3 ms·
The people that are couple of sigmas more talented than the average are unique enough. They are category of their own. So using them as pro-diversity argument i
by venomsnake 10y ago
The people that are couple of sigmas more talented than the average are unique enough. They are category of their own. So using them as pro-diversity argument is just not working. Because any person with the Turing's level of talent is already employed, no matter what other identities may posses. Brilliance overrides everything else.
The problem is that outside the likes of Srinivasa Ramanujan people need a hell lot of education to become the best. And unlike innate talent education is not equally distributed in society.
So the pool is very skewed.
- shaftoe 10y agoSo, improve equality of access to education. We already have multiple top computer science programs publishing their courses online for all for free. So, lower the barrier to getting started and learning from hands on experience. Github and other sites host code, discussions, and documentation for more projects than a lifetime of hacking could touch. No one knows who you are behind a handle. You seem like one of those people who thinks that quotas will magically improve companies, diversity, and people's lives. You are falling victim to the soft bigotry of reduced expectations. This isn't fair, particularly to the groups in question.
- venomsnake 10y agoI am staunchly against quotas and affirmative action. And supporter of pure merit hiring - not even culture fit. Just expertise. This does not mean that this approach did not yield something that the current crop of diversity thinkers strongly dislikes.