10 ms·

Nobody opposes diversity of experience, perspective, skill, etc. It really is helpful to have people with different use cases testing and developing the softwar

by b6 9y ago

Nobody opposes diversity of experience, perspective, skill, etc. It really is helpful to have people with different use cases testing and developing the software. But "diversity" is being used to mean diversity of gender, ethnicity, etc., as if it matters, as if it is a reliable proxy for those other things like experience and perspective and skill, when it's not. When I was starting to program and talk to people on the net, nobody cared about my age or ethnicity or gender. I was just a name and an area code and some skills. The compiler certainly did not care about my ethnicity or gender. It was perfectly fair to me. I will not go out of my way to try to rope people into my projects because they have different color skin. If people show up to help, I welcome them. I don't particularly care about their genetic code. I don't have any preconception about what the graphs of the ethnicities and genders of contributors would look like. Who cares? We are not our bodies and I won't help build a future where body attributes are considered an important part of identity.

fapjacks 9y ago
This is one of the most well-spoken comments I've ever read on HN.
atomi 9y ago
> as if it matters In terms of programming, where the domain is very specific, I somewhat agree that it doesn't matter. But in a more general sense, since it's life experiences that culminate into who a person is, their perspective will be based on their identity. And it will vary in unexpected ways. If you're a large company in a diverse market like the American market or a global market, you don't want to appear tone deaf in terms of your marketing and your products. So it's important to get differing perspectives before that new launch.
- wyager 9y ago
  > So it's important to get differing perspectives before that new launch. Sure, which is why your marketing team has to be familiar with regional cultures and customs. It doesn't mean you need to account for every target cultural group on your IT support staff.
  - atomi 9y ago
    Well yeah, you've successfully paraphrased my point. As always, context matters.
- Bartweiss 9y ago
  I definitely appreciated the Unicode example in this article. It's a nice, clear case where having more diversity (in this case, someone who regularly uses a non-ASCII language) on a team can increase value rapidly. Having someone around who says "hey, this system won't handle my name right, that's super annoying" can add value to the project for a few billion people. Obviously team diversity isn't the only way to achieve that gain, but it's a good one that's often lacking.
tptacek 9y ago
This comment doesn't say anything. Except in very rare cases, people aren't premising their arguments against "diversity" on overt animosity for women and people of color. All you're doing is restating the fundamental dispute: "is it acceptable to continue the practices that have led to an industry disproportionately lacking women and people of color?" The "yes" argument obviously says compilers don't care about gender or skin color. The "no" argument says that arguments in favor of inequitable staffing are a form of the Just World Fallacy. You need to do better than just restate those arguments to add something new.
- b6 9y ago
  There's no need to add something new. I'm just resisting the rise of these new more insidious forms of racism and sexism.
  - tptacek 9y ago
    That's not so much an argument as it is a tired play on words, an attempt to define away the debate. Your opponents in this debate do not believe that working to correct overt exclusion of women and people of color from the industry is a form of racism or sexism. Meanwhile, everyone agrees that such overt exclusion, if it exists, is racist or sexist. So you can argue about whether that exclusion exists, but you can't shut down the argument by claiming that it's somehow racist/sexist against white men.
    - lobster2 9y ago
      By trying to 'correct overt exclusion of women and people of color from the industry'you will basically treat those people preferential over the prevailing population (i.e. white, asian and jewish men). What's not racist and sexist about that?
    - wyager 9y ago
      > overt exclusion Low turnout does not imply someone is being excluded. Different groups of people tend to have different interests. > everyone agrees that such overt exclusion, if it exists, is racist or sexist. > So you can argue about whether that exclusion exists, but you can't shut down the argument by claiming that it's somehow racist/sexist against white men. I don't even know what kind of fallacy this is, but it's definitely out there. "If this hypothetical thing we made up does exist, that would make your argument wrong, so you can't use that argument." Whatever pie-in-the-sky claims you want to make, the direct, practical, and real-world effect of these policies is subverting meritocracy and discriminating against groups of people who are political targets (white and Asian men). It is absolutely both racist and sexist in any sane, non-doublespeak sense of the words.
KirinDave 9y ago
> But "diversity" is being used to mean diversity of gender, ethnicity, etc., as if it matters, as if it is a reliable proxy for those other things like experience and perspective and skill, when it's not. Yes, b6. It is. Your personal experience is of course unique. While your experience may have familiar notes with many people, it's fundamentally different from someone who grew up as a young girl. Your fears and the options presented to you are going to be different. Identical people come to similar conclusions. Folks who have raised this idea of "diversity of thought" think that it adequately addresses this idea that diversity is a value add for software by saying, "Well it's all about thought." But those initial conditions our minds are so sensitive to are not easily ignored. You cannot have it both ways in this. Either you simply don't care about diversity (which is a value decision I am not denying your ability to make), or you do and physical indicators that shape how society treats people are a high quality signal of diversity. You cannot rationally suggest both that diversity is important but that people's traits and backgrounds aren't. People try to turn this into a value proposition here (as it seems like you may be doing) are taking half the situation into account. For a value proposition, you're looking at your project's upside. For example, a product primarily aimed uniquely at women would probably be best served by a qualified woman. But even in this, bias creeps in (the famous study results suggesting men are so acclimated to dominating the conversation that when women talk for half the time, men perceive it as oppressive). In this specific scenario, women have reported being hired and then simply not given the power to do their jobs, or not being present in larger orgs with sufficient numbers to create the impact they were hired to create. But the diversity movement is also trying to reduce the downside for individuals who often find themselves on the brunt end of unfair standards, inappropriate behavior and discriminatory teammates. You may talk all day about how "my compiler doesn't care" but this is you looking down at your desk quietly as folks all over the industry go through terrible and unfair treatment. Your compiler doesn't care about that, but you should. You suggest that changing this status quo would actually be a more subtle form of racism or sexism. This is true, insofar as the top article accidentally falls into a paternalistic role and offers open source housekeeping roles to women as a token offering, thinking this is an incentive. In terms of damaging the fortunes of white men at the expense of offering other people, the truth is that correcting for gender and racial bias in our industry will bring us closer to a meritocracy and offer more potential for talent to emerge than the current state of affairs.

by b6 9y ago

fapjacks 9y ago

This is one of the most well-spoken comments I've ever read on HN.

atomi 9y ago

> as if it matters In terms of programming, where the domain is very specific, I somewhat agree that it doesn't matter. But in a more general sense, since it's life experiences that culminate into who a person is, their perspective will be based on their identity. And it will vary in unexpected ways. If you're a large company in a diverse market like the American market or a global market, you don't want to appear tone deaf in terms of your marketing and your products. So it's important to get differing perspectives before that new launch.

wyager 9y ago
> So it's important to get differing perspectives before that new launch. Sure, which is why your marketing team has to be familiar with regional cultures and customs. It doesn't mean you need to account for every target cultural group on your IT support staff.
- atomi 9y ago
  Well yeah, you've successfully paraphrased my point. As always, context matters.
Bartweiss 9y ago
I definitely appreciated the Unicode example in this article. It's a nice, clear case where having more diversity (in this case, someone who regularly uses a non-ASCII language) on a team can increase value rapidly. Having someone around who says "hey, this system won't handle my name right, that's super annoying" can add value to the project for a few billion people. Obviously team diversity isn't the only way to achieve that gain, but it's a good one that's often lacking.

tptacek 9y ago

This comment doesn't say anything. Except in very rare cases, people aren't premising their arguments against "diversity" on overt animosity for women and people of color. All you're doing is restating the fundamental dispute: "is it acceptable to continue the practices that have led to an industry disproportionately lacking women and people of color?" The "yes" argument obviously says compilers don't care about gender or skin color. The "no" argument says that arguments in favor of inequitable staffing are a form of the Just World Fallacy. You need to do better than just restate those arguments to add something new.

b6 9y ago
There's no need to add something new. I'm just resisting the rise of these new more insidious forms of racism and sexism.
- tptacek 9y ago
  That's not so much an argument as it is a tired play on words, an attempt to define away the debate. Your opponents in this debate do not believe that working to correct overt exclusion of women and people of color from the industry is a form of racism or sexism. Meanwhile, everyone agrees that such overt exclusion, if it exists, is racist or sexist. So you can argue about whether that exclusion exists, but you can't shut down the argument by claiming that it's somehow racist/sexist against white men.
  - lobster2 9y ago
    By trying to 'correct overt exclusion of women and people of color from the industry'you will basically treat those people preferential over the prevailing population (i.e. white, asian and jewish men). What's not racist and sexist about that?
  - wyager 9y ago
    > overt exclusion Low turnout does not imply someone is being excluded. Different groups of people tend to have different interests. > everyone agrees that such overt exclusion, if it exists, is racist or sexist. > So you can argue about whether that exclusion exists, but you can't shut down the argument by claiming that it's somehow racist/sexist against white men. I don't even know what kind of fallacy this is, but it's definitely out there. "If this hypothetical thing we made up does exist, that would make your argument wrong, so you can't use that argument." Whatever pie-in-the-sky claims you want to make, the direct, practical, and real-world effect of these policies is subverting meritocracy and discriminating against groups of people who are political targets (white and Asian men). It is absolutely both racist and sexist in any sane, non-doublespeak sense of the words.

KirinDave 9y ago

> But "diversity" is being used to mean diversity of gender, ethnicity, etc., as if it matters, as if it is a reliable proxy for those other things like experience and perspective and skill, when it's not. Yes, b6. It is. Your personal experience is of course unique. While your experience may have familiar notes with many people, it's fundamentally different from someone who grew up as a young girl. Your fears and the options presented to you are going to be different. Identical people come to similar conclusions. Folks who have raised this idea of "diversity of thought" think that it adequately addresses this idea that diversity is a value add for software by saying, "Well it's all about thought." But those initial conditions our minds are so sensitive to are not easily ignored. You cannot have it both ways in this. Either you simply don't care about diversity (which is a value decision I am not denying your ability to make), or you do and physical indicators that shape how society treats people are a high quality signal of diversity. You cannot rationally suggest both that diversity is important but that people's traits and backgrounds aren't. People try to turn this into a value proposition here (as it seems like you may be doing) are taking half the situation into account. For a value proposition, you're looking at your project's upside. For example, a product primarily aimed uniquely at women would probably be best served by a qualified woman. But even in this, bias creeps in (the famous study results suggesting men are so acclimated to dominating the conversation that when women talk for half the time, men perceive it as oppressive). In this specific scenario, women have reported being hired and then simply not given the power to do their jobs, or not being present in larger orgs with sufficient numbers to create the impact they were hired to create. But the diversity movement is also trying to reduce the downside for individuals who often find themselves on the brunt end of unfair standards, inappropriate behavior and discriminatory teammates. You may talk all day about how "my compiler doesn't care" but this is you looking down at your desk quietly as folks all over the industry go through terrible and unfair treatment. Your compiler doesn't care about that, but you should. You suggest that changing this status quo would actually be a more subtle form of racism or sexism. This is true, insofar as the top article accidentally falls into a paternalistic role and offers open source housekeeping roles to women as a token offering, thinking this is an incentive. In terms of damaging the fortunes of white men at the expense of offering other people, the truth is that correcting for gender and racial bias in our industry will bring us closer to a meritocracy and offer more potential for talent to emerge than the current state of affairs.