4 ms·

I wish the article connected the dots of her path from studying physics at the University of Pennsylvania to working as an SRE at a San Francisco tech company.

I wish the article connected the dots of her path from studying physics at the University of Pennsylvania to working as an SRE at a San Francisco tech company. It seems like that might be an interesting part of her story. I loved the anecdote of her buying her own leather jacket when Uber couldn't be bothered to buy them for women. Brilliant. The title is a bit unfortunate in that it makes her sound like an Attorney General but that's nothing to with her but the NY Time's Maureen Dowd who has a penchant for sensational titles.

fizixer 9y ago
I feel for what happened to her at Uber but, no offense, her description of her physics achievements appeared to be borderline bullshit (e.g., things like studying for quantum field theory exams a year and half after getting introduced to college level physics and math for the first time, after picking philosophy as a major originally. And then proceeding to blog about how everyone can do this because she can).
- goseeastarwar 9y ago
  That deafening silence is hopefully encouraging you to reflect on why you decided to write this response.
- linkregister 9y ago
  I'm not skeptical about her physics achievements, so I don't agree with your opinion. I don't understand why this post was flagged. Down votes are for communicating "I don't like this post." Flagging is for violation of community guidelines, or just plain abusive comments. To respond to your claim, I'd like to point to you her blog post on the subject. She does a good job of explaining how she went from zero to being knowledgeable about physics in this post: https://fledglingphysicist.com/2013/12/12/if-susan-can-learn-physics-so-can-you/ https://fledglingphysicist.com/2013/12/12/if-susan-can-learn.... Essentially she always was interested in the subject but didn't believe she was smart enough to pursue it, until she was encouraged to take an introductory course.
  - mirimir 9y ago
    It's my understanding that down votes are for posts that are off-topic, or don't contribute to the discussion. And flagging, as you say, is for violating community guidelines. But sadly enough, people do use down votes for posts that they don't like, and flagging for posts that they really don't like. So it goes.
    - linkregister 9y ago
      I used to share your opinion about down votes, until I read in the HN guidelines that there was no explanation for what down votes really were for, while flagging was explicitly defined. It seems the HN cultural practice is to down vote posts people don't like or just disagree with. I would rather people reply, but I can't do anything except for practice what I believe is right: I'll down vote a post that doesn't contribute to the discussion, as you do. Since "doesn't contribute to the discussion" is vague and subjective, I can't claim particularly high moral ground.
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
  - smnscu 9y ago
    I generally am against rallying against people with more "out there" opinions, like in this case, as I think it's toxic to establishing common grounds for a healthy discussion with people we fundamentally disagree with. Even so, I'm myself guilty of this knee-jerk reaction to downvote/flag stuff I disagree with. I believe this is how you get to the incredible tribalism-fueled divide between "the left" and "the right" in the US right now, and what pushes moderates into supporting people like Trump (not that dissimilar to how many dictators got to power in the past). That being said, in this particular case I have to wonder, what the fuck is the relevance of her physics credentials in this story? For one, she worked as a SRE and got hired based on her capability to do the job (whether you think interviews are a good gauge of job performance or not should be irrelevant), but more importantly does her being a good performer or not have __anything__ to do with how much she should be valued as a human being? Is blatant sexism and trampling someone's fundamental rights OK if said someone is low on the social hierarchy or meritocracy? The mere way this argument seems to be formed is fundamentally strange to me.
falcolas 9y ago
We currently have two physics doctorates working in the same department as me. The trajectory for both was the same - they wrote code as an integral part of obtaining heir doctorate, and realized they could 1) get a job today and 2) make a lot more money working as entry level SREs than as physicists. They're both intelligent and willing to learn; traits that mattered a lot more to us than a CS degree. Both also moved to follow the job, and neither regrets it. One worked on her doctorate at CERN, the other at a US facility (I don't recall the name off hand).
poothrowaway 9y ago
>Uber couldn't be bothered to buy them for women Let it be known the manager who made the decision not to buy jackets for women only worked at Uber for a year, made a magnificent mess of SRE, and went back to Google with a more senior position. This same guy made a data science manager (who has a PhD in theoretical chemistry) take notes during his meetings, and who coincidentally was one of his only female reports. Fuck you NSK.
- diebir 9y ago
  The fact that the old Uber HR did nothing to prevent sexual harassment clearly puts the blame on (upper) management. Yet, the specific cases involved people lower down the chain, and it is indeed a revolving door between Google, Facebook and other prominent tech companies. The same bad actors are still around and just have moved on.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
stevenwoo 9y ago
Tangentially in the 90's one of my high school classmates got his masters in physics and was working on a PhD in electrical engineering when his research professor had him working on software analyzing state of Texas forestry data ( I thought this was a weird cross pollination). He preferred software to the difficult career path ahead for staying in physics (compete for work in labs /PhD/research/tenure or teaching until tenure) and after getting his PhD worked his way up from programmer to CTO of software companies in Austin.

fizixer 9y ago

I feel for what happened to her at Uber but, no offense, her description of her physics achievements appeared to be borderline bullshit (e.g., things like studying for quantum field theory exams a year and half after getting introduced to college level physics and math for the first time, after picking philosophy as a major originally. And then proceeding to blog about how everyone can do this because she can).

goseeastarwar 9y ago
That deafening silence is hopefully encouraging you to reflect on why you decided to write this response.
linkregister 9y ago
I'm not skeptical about her physics achievements, so I don't agree with your opinion. I don't understand why this post was flagged. Down votes are for communicating "I don't like this post." Flagging is for violation of community guidelines, or just plain abusive comments. To respond to your claim, I'd like to point to you her blog post on the subject. She does a good job of explaining how she went from zero to being knowledgeable about physics in this post: https://fledglingphysicist.com/2013/12/12/if-susan-can-learn-physics-so-can-you/ https://fledglingphysicist.com/2013/12/12/if-susan-can-learn.... Essentially she always was interested in the subject but didn't believe she was smart enough to pursue it, until she was encouraged to take an introductory course.
- mirimir 9y ago
  It's my understanding that down votes are for posts that are off-topic, or don't contribute to the discussion. And flagging, as you say, is for violating community guidelines. But sadly enough, people do use down votes for posts that they don't like, and flagging for posts that they really don't like. So it goes.
  - linkregister 9y ago
    I used to share your opinion about down votes, until I read in the HN guidelines that there was no explanation for what down votes really were for, while flagging was explicitly defined. It seems the HN cultural practice is to down vote posts people don't like or just disagree with. I would rather people reply, but I can't do anything except for practice what I believe is right: I'll down vote a post that doesn't contribute to the discussion, as you do. Since "doesn't contribute to the discussion" is vague and subjective, I can't claim particularly high moral ground.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
- smnscu 9y ago
  I generally am against rallying against people with more "out there" opinions, like in this case, as I think it's toxic to establishing common grounds for a healthy discussion with people we fundamentally disagree with. Even so, I'm myself guilty of this knee-jerk reaction to downvote/flag stuff I disagree with. I believe this is how you get to the incredible tribalism-fueled divide between "the left" and "the right" in the US right now, and what pushes moderates into supporting people like Trump (not that dissimilar to how many dictators got to power in the past). That being said, in this particular case I have to wonder, what the fuck is the relevance of her physics credentials in this story? For one, she worked as a SRE and got hired based on her capability to do the job (whether you think interviews are a good gauge of job performance or not should be irrelevant), but more importantly does her being a good performer or not have __anything__ to do with how much she should be valued as a human being? Is blatant sexism and trampling someone's fundamental rights OK if said someone is low on the social hierarchy or meritocracy? The mere way this argument seems to be formed is fundamentally strange to me.

falcolas 9y ago

We currently have two physics doctorates working in the same department as me. The trajectory for both was the same - they wrote code as an integral part of obtaining heir doctorate, and realized they could 1) get a job today and 2) make a lot more money working as entry level SREs than as physicists. They're both intelligent and willing to learn; traits that mattered a lot more to us than a CS degree. Both also moved to follow the job, and neither regrets it. One worked on her doctorate at CERN, the other at a US facility (I don't recall the name off hand).

poothrowaway 9y ago

>Uber couldn't be bothered to buy them for women Let it be known the manager who made the decision not to buy jackets for women only worked at Uber for a year, made a magnificent mess of SRE, and went back to Google with a more senior position. This same guy made a data science manager (who has a PhD in theoretical chemistry) take notes during his meetings, and who coincidentally was one of his only female reports. Fuck you NSK.

diebir 9y ago
The fact that the old Uber HR did nothing to prevent sexual harassment clearly puts the blame on (upper) management. Yet, the specific cases involved people lower down the chain, and it is indeed a revolving door between Google, Facebook and other prominent tech companies. The same bad actors are still around and just have moved on.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

stevenwoo 9y ago

Tangentially in the 90's one of my high school classmates got his masters in physics and was working on a PhD in electrical engineering when his research professor had him working on software analyzing state of Texas forestry data ( I thought this was a weird cross pollination). He preferred software to the difficult career path ahead for staying in physics (compete for work in labs /PhD/research/tenure or teaching until tenure) and after getting his PhD worked his way up from programmer to CTO of software companies in Austin.