5 ms·

With their high number of (rejected) applications and subjective criteria they can of course shape these statistics any way they want. So is this progress or S

With their high number of (rejected) applications and subjective criteria they can of course shape these statistics any way they want. So is this progress or Stanford appearing progressive? There is no way to tell.

sloanesturz 11y ago
At Stanford, undergrads are admitted generally to the school, then they get to pick whichever major they like. Most students don't pick a major until sophomore or junior year. Stanford accepts 50% women and more of those women are picking to become CS majors after they get in, when they didn't just a few years ago. This is actually progress.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- argonaut 11y ago
  To be fair, applicants indicate major areas that they're interested in. The admissions committe may or may not take that info into account in deciding on applicants.
bjwbell 11y ago
You doubt university administrators sincerity ;) I've noticed very few of these articles look at the recent past ('80s) when women were a significant percentage of programmers. I'm too young but I have the feeling working conditions were much better back then.
- eru 11y ago
  > I'm too young but I have the feeling working conditions were much better back then. You mean working conditions for programmers? From talking to people who worked in computing back then (like my grandfather), it seems like we have it better today. Of course that's only anecdotal, and my perception of today is as coloured as my choice of people to talk to. Would be interesting to see a more formal study.
  - droidist2 11y ago
    Old people always say they had it worse though. "In my day we had to walk 15 miles in the snow to compile our code." Yeah but rent costed 2 days pay back then, not 2 weeks.
    - hawkice 11y ago
      Took me a while to find actual numbers that could give good approximations of how true this is. http://www.tenement.org/encyclopedia/housing_rent.htm http://www.tenement.org/encyclopedia/housing_rent.htm Turns out, it's actually pretty accurate. But food was much more expensive, sucking up maybe ten days of income (and that's 100% groceries, which is rare enough these days, I suppose). Clothing, though, that's where you see the real change. Cheaper these days in non-inflation adjusted dollars than it was in the 1890's, in you can believe it (maybe I buy fewer articles of clothing than most people, but likely not less clothing than people in 1890).
    - zobzu 11y ago
      Oddly accurate, I guess bay area rent is indeed pay in about 2 weeks with current salaries. Source: my rent is about 2 weeks of pay (which sucks and doesn't feel very sustainable, mind you)
    - eru 11y ago
      Oh, I didn't ask directly about how bad he had it. More like general talking about working conditions (and he sees them as normal).
throwaway13337 11y ago
I don't know why people feel the need to vote the parent down. It was a valid question even if it might be progress indeed. Schools often shape their admissions - good that this isn't one of those cases.

sloanesturz 11y ago

At Stanford, undergrads are admitted generally to the school, then they get to pick whichever major they like. Most students don't pick a major until sophomore or junior year. Stanford accepts 50% women and more of those women are picking to become CS majors after they get in, when they didn't just a few years ago. This is actually progress.

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
argonaut 11y ago
To be fair, applicants indicate major areas that they're interested in. The admissions committe may or may not take that info into account in deciding on applicants.

bjwbell 11y ago

You doubt university administrators sincerity ;) I've noticed very few of these articles look at the recent past ('80s) when women were a significant percentage of programmers. I'm too young but I have the feeling working conditions were much better back then.

eru 11y ago
> I'm too young but I have the feeling working conditions were much better back then. You mean working conditions for programmers? From talking to people who worked in computing back then (like my grandfather), it seems like we have it better today. Of course that's only anecdotal, and my perception of today is as coloured as my choice of people to talk to. Would be interesting to see a more formal study.
- droidist2 11y ago
  Old people always say they had it worse though. "In my day we had to walk 15 miles in the snow to compile our code." Yeah but rent costed 2 days pay back then, not 2 weeks.
  - hawkice 11y ago
    Took me a while to find actual numbers that could give good approximations of how true this is. http://www.tenement.org/encyclopedia/housing_rent.htm http://www.tenement.org/encyclopedia/housing_rent.htm Turns out, it's actually pretty accurate. But food was much more expensive, sucking up maybe ten days of income (and that's 100% groceries, which is rare enough these days, I suppose). Clothing, though, that's where you see the real change. Cheaper these days in non-inflation adjusted dollars than it was in the 1890's, in you can believe it (maybe I buy fewer articles of clothing than most people, but likely not less clothing than people in 1890).
  - zobzu 11y ago
    Oddly accurate, I guess bay area rent is indeed pay in about 2 weeks with current salaries. Source: my rent is about 2 weeks of pay (which sucks and doesn't feel very sustainable, mind you)
  - eru 11y ago
    Oh, I didn't ask directly about how bad he had it. More like general talking about working conditions (and he sees them as normal).

throwaway13337 11y ago

I don't know why people feel the need to vote the parent down. It was a valid question even if it might be progress indeed. Schools often shape their admissions - good that this isn't one of those cases.