4 ms·

The world today is so weird that I have to ask. Are you proposing that we should modify anti-discrimination laws so employers can take affirmative action to inc

The world today is so weird that I have to ask. Are you proposing that we should modify anti-discrimination laws so employers can take affirmative action to increase diversity? Or are you saying we should allow employers to discriminate against minorities for technical jobs?

yuhong 10y ago
I am mainly saying that the laws are fundamentally flawed when applied to anything but manual labor and similar jobs. The key difference is whether the job is easily measurable. This does not imply that I approve of discrimination.
- matt4077 10y ago
  > This does not imply that I approve of discrimination. Yeah, it kinda does. Keep in mind that the burden of proof is on the plaintiff in discrimination cases. If there are any problems with applying these laws to high-skilled work (I'm guessing you mean something like "it's too hard to compare people for this sort of work"), those problems would diminish the plaintiffs' cases more than anything.
  - yuhong 10y ago
    Too subjective, more importantly. A Slashdot comment compared it to selecting friends: https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=9857155&cid=53238301 https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=9857155&cid=53238301
    - matt4077 10y ago
      aka "The Old Boys' Club". I think your idea that you should be allowed not to hire African-Americans or women even if they're equally or better qualified is quite offensive. Even worse is that your argument now seems to be that you wouldn't want them as friends, either. And, worst of all, that you think that this community would share this attitude and could be convinced by it.
      - yuhong 10y ago
        The point is that selecting programming team members is more like selecting friends than selecting for example assembly-line workers, which makes anti-discrimination laws less effective.
    - dfabulich 10y ago
      You linked approvingly to that comment. I downvoted your post and your upthread comment as a result. I would flag that comment if it were posted to HN, and I'll explain why below. The comment argues that a woman (a "girl") should have no more or less control over her body than a corporation should have over its employees. One reason that's immoral is that people want autonomy, they thrive under it, and they deserve autonomy as a basic human right. Therefore, we should minimize the amount of control that corporations have over employees and maximize the amount of control people have over their own bodies. (And for too long, too many men think they should have control over women's bodies, especially deciding who women should be "allowed"/forced to partner with, so it's especially important that women be allowed to control their own bodies.) The comment you linked to isn't just incorrect; it's gross. It reduces the quality of HN as a forum, and it leaves me unwilling to read your upthread comment in a positive light.
      - yuhong 10y ago
        Yea, I would not go as far as the comment says either.

yuhong 10y ago

I am mainly saying that the laws are fundamentally flawed when applied to anything but manual labor and similar jobs. The key difference is whether the job is easily measurable. This does not imply that I approve of discrimination.

matt4077 10y ago
> This does not imply that I approve of discrimination. Yeah, it kinda does. Keep in mind that the burden of proof is on the plaintiff in discrimination cases. If there are any problems with applying these laws to high-skilled work (I'm guessing you mean something like "it's too hard to compare people for this sort of work"), those problems would diminish the plaintiffs' cases more than anything.
- yuhong 10y ago
  Too subjective, more importantly. A Slashdot comment compared it to selecting friends: https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=9857155&cid=53238301 https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=9857155&cid=53238301
  - matt4077 10y ago
    aka "The Old Boys' Club". I think your idea that you should be allowed not to hire African-Americans or women even if they're equally or better qualified is quite offensive. Even worse is that your argument now seems to be that you wouldn't want them as friends, either. And, worst of all, that you think that this community would share this attitude and could be convinced by it.
    - yuhong 10y ago
      The point is that selecting programming team members is more like selecting friends than selecting for example assembly-line workers, which makes anti-discrimination laws less effective.
  - dfabulich 10y ago
    You linked approvingly to that comment. I downvoted your post and your upthread comment as a result. I would flag that comment if it were posted to HN, and I'll explain why below. The comment argues that a woman (a "girl") should have no more or less control over her body than a corporation should have over its employees. One reason that's immoral is that people want autonomy, they thrive under it, and they deserve autonomy as a basic human right. Therefore, we should minimize the amount of control that corporations have over employees and maximize the amount of control people have over their own bodies. (And for too long, too many men think they should have control over women's bodies, especially deciding who women should be "allowed"/forced to partner with, so it's especially important that women be allowed to control their own bodies.) The comment you linked to isn't just incorrect; it's gross. It reduces the quality of HN as a forum, and it leaves me unwilling to read your upthread comment in a positive light.
    - yuhong 10y ago
      Yea, I would not go as far as the comment says either.