1. This forum section is a read-only archive which contains old newsgroup posts. If you wish to post a query, please do so in one of our main forum sections (here). This way you will get a faster, better response from the members on Motherboard Point.

Jury rules for AMD in discrimination suit

Discussion in 'AMD Overclocking' started by Ed, Sep 11, 2003.

  1. Ed

    Ed Guest

    SAN FRANCISCO, Sept 11 (Reuters) - A California jury on Thursday ruled
    that chip maker Advanced Micro Devices Inc. (NYSE:AMD - News) did not
    discriminate against a former executive who claimed his work was
    undermined by the company because he is Muslim.

    http://biz.yahoo.com/rc/030911/tech_amd_lawsuit_1.html

    Ed
     
    Ed, Sep 11, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Ed

    CLF Guest

    I'm sure I've been discriminated against cuz I'm white, but you don't see me
    bitching.

    Anytime any minority (which collectivley probably is majority) is passed up
    for a job or screws something up it is always discrimination.

    Good ruling on this case....
     
    CLF, Sep 11, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Ed

    CLF Guest

    Just a followup to that, I have many Asian and actually a
    Lebanses-Italian-Irish-English-American friend, so I'm not a racist or
    anything, it's just not a cool thing to keep acussing the whites of
    discrimination because of whatever you are, be it color or religion or sex
    or anything, vice-versa it's not a cool thing to be racist or religion-ist
    or sexist or whatever-ist.

    Anyways....
     
    CLF, Sep 11, 2003
    #3
  4. Ed

    rstlne Guest

    I think it had more to do with the fact that 9-11 happen'd and he "felt"
    under pressure because of his nationality, no so much his skin color but
    just because of where he was from..
     
    rstlne, Sep 11, 2003
    #4
  5. Ed

    Cyber Chum Guest

    Yea, I used to work for a company that got in the habit of hiring only
    minority races because it made them look good. Reverse discrimination.
     
    Cyber Chum, Sep 11, 2003
    #5
  6. Ed

    BF Guest

    Give me a Fu**ing break.
     
    BF, Sep 11, 2003
    #6
  7. Ed

    rstlne Guest

    discriminate against a former executive who claimed his work was
    In his case it wasnt true, but i'll not name a group of people that feel
    anyone who is arabic in any way shape or form is a terrorist who's out to
    get rid of them. I know for a FACT how many people feel and I do think it
    probably is happening..

    Course this was just an attempt for a top level exec to get that bonus that
    he didnt get because of poor company results
     
    rstlne, Sep 12, 2003
    #7
  8. Ed

    David Burns Guest

    I don't mean to jump on you for this, but I see this all too much. There is
    no such thing as 'reverse discrimination'; discrimination is discrimination.
     
    David Burns, Sep 12, 2003
    #8
  9. Not according to the law, as practiced. It's impossible for a
    black to be guilty of a "hate crime" against a white, for
    instance. Blacks are awarded preferential admission to UofM.
    That's not discrimination. It's reverse...

    What you say *should* be true, alas...
     
    Keith R. Williams, Sep 12, 2003
    #9
  10. There were such cases...
     
    Alexander Grigoriev, Sep 12, 2003
    #10
  11. Ed

    Cyber Chum Guest

    A company deliberately hires minorities so it looks PC and not racist
    but at the same time they are discriminating against more qualified
    people of the majority race. That is called reverse discrimination. Or
    are you talking semantics and getting all pedantic on me?
     
    Cyber Chum, Sep 12, 2003
    #11
  12. Ed

    Dave Guest

    discrimination.

    So what would you call mandatory minority quotas? The "reverse" part
    indicates clearly that the pendulum has swung too far to the other extreme.
    All arguments over semantics aside, it's unfortunate to see that there seems
    to be no interest to establish an effective middle ground, instead of trying
    to legislate morality in a haphazard, blanket fashion. I believe
    qualifications speak for themselves, regardless of race, gender, or
    appearance. I just wish everyone else did, society might be the better for
    it...perhaps there should be another law passed ;-). I propose the
    "Anti-Reverse-Discrimination Amendment". Skip, reverse, draw two, Uno. Never
    mind if the first two terms cancel each other and we're left with the same
    ignorant bigotry and hatred as before. Nothing's changed in any case.
     
    Dave, Sep 12, 2003
    #12
  13. Ed

    Stacey Guest

    Keith R. Williams wrote:

    Yep, I was talking with one of our black customers (I work at a car shop)
    and he said "I hate it that I have to let a white man work on my car but I
    can't seem to find a black mechanic who can fix this problem". I responded
    halfway joking "Isn't that being a little racist?" He then said "I can't be
    racist, I'm black!"

    Is that reverse enough? One sided anyway. God only know what would happen if
    I had taken my car to a black mechanic and said what he did.
     
    Stacey, Sep 12, 2003
    #13
  14. Ed

    rstlne Guest

    A company deliberately hires minorities so it looks PC and not racist
    In some respects you have to support the idea of this. I think that in
    "MOST" of the world this doesnt really apply because what your doing is
    telling company x that they must hire minoritys to fill x% of the positions
    just because they are minoritys. If your neighborhood and schools are mixed
    with all classes and all ethnic origins then this type of system doesnt work
    and it's probably harmful. Take 13 blocks of city housing filled with
    unskilled minoritys, schooling made up only of the people from that system,
    and this tatic is something that MIGHT do verry good in the long run. The
    "idea" is that you give people in these systems a chance to work, and that
    the next generation (the children) then have other people to look up to. If
    they compare a drug dealer making 3 or 4 thousand dollars a day to their
    neighbor who's making 18 dollars a day (14 after he pays for his public
    transport) then who will they choose. The problem with this method is that
    anyone who gets a good job or a good education tend to leave those areas. I
    dont think that "Government Requirements" are a good thing in most cases but
    I do think they would help in some situations.

    My .02
     
    rstlne, Sep 12, 2003
    #14
  15. Ed

    Tony Guest

    LOOK, I know this started out as being about AMD....but dont you guys
    think your just a LITTLE OT now :)
     
    Tony, Sep 12, 2003
    #15
  16. Ed

    David Burns Guest

     
    David Burns, Sep 12, 2003
    #16
  17. Ed

    Steve Vai Guest

    i agree, everyone is out to get minorities, we need to plot against
    them 24 hours a day, make sure they don't get jobs etc etc...it's our
    "plan"....i'm so sick of this shit man, **** minorities who whine
    about discrimination...cause the wind blew the wrong way and fucked up
    their hair, it was the racist white guy who turned on the fan...
    blacks can't be convicted of hate crimes...look at chante mallard, the
    black lady who ran over the white guy, left him in her windshield for
    what, 3 days or something? then had other blacks dump his body...at a
    party she said "i hit this white guy" ....you tell me.
     
    Steve Vai, Sep 13, 2003
    #17
  18. Ed

    Stacey Guest

    rstlne wrote:

    And the guy making 14 a day is alive for more than 3 weeks.... If they want
    easy money what other option do they have to make 3 to 4 thousand a day?
     
    Stacey, Sep 13, 2003
    #18
  19. Ed

    CLF Guest

    I worked for a college for a while, and one of the things we kept track of
    was not only the race of the students, but the employees as well, and we
    kept track of the student's race (as a percent not every student's name &
    race) for other colleges in the other state colleges. I know for sure that
    in this setting, the students, that the population of minorities in state
    that went to K-12 was 22% (I guess that means we're about 78% white), but
    the college only had something like 17% minority. They were aggresivley
    trying to fill the other 5%. The easiest way to do this, because you are
    talking about percents instead of a raw number, is to stop letting whites
    attend. This means that only minorities can enter, and that boosts the
    percent up quicker. Now, does that sound right?

    I can find a few problems in this situation, besides the most obvious white
    discrimination. The second one is that the 22% is for the percent of people
    in K-12, not the percent of applicants. Had they chosen the percent of
    applicants to to base this biased figured on, it might have been found to be
    more like 15%. You can't count any of those people in K-12 who don't
    graduate, graduate with terrible grades, don't plan to go to college, and
    you have to add in anybody who's graduated with good grades, is a minority,
    and wants to attend now, after taking a year off or going back for a
    master's degree or whatever, or had dropped out and want to start again.

    Either way you put it, if a company has two equally qualified people, one is
    a minority, one is white, guess who's going to get that job, far more than
    50% of the time? What happens if the white person is a little more
    qualified for the job? Probably the same thing.....

    Something needs to be changed. You can't remove racisism from everybody's
    mind, if anybody's going to be racist, then they're going to be racist.
    There needs to be a law that removes affirmative action. Then we end up
    where we were before that was passed. The minorities will probably moan and
    whine and get the law passed a 2nd time, just because the politicians want
    to appeal to the minorities, while ignoring the majority. Then we are were
    we are today :(
     
    CLF, Sep 13, 2003
    #19
  20. Ed

    Beoweolf Guest

    So you are saying, as a rule...there is no discrimination? That every case
    brought before the courts is some how fraudulent and facetious? You may be
    right, but somehow I can't see it.
     
    Beoweolf, Sep 13, 2003
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.