3 ms·

> > Maybe it is wrong that SV companies have proportionally more Asians than whites. Not "morally wrong", but wrong in the sense that Asian communities have opt

> > Maybe it is wrong that SV companies have proportionally more Asians than whites. Not "morally wrong", but wrong in the sense that Asian communities have optimized for certain metrics (tests, school performances, college aspirations) and SV companies have just gone along with what's in the pipeline. > How is that wrong? Let the other communities optimize for those metrics too. what if it's missing candidates that could do the job? what if the filter is using metrics that aren't actually the best proxy for what we're trying to optimize? you missed this part of the comment you were replying to: > Despite the fact that SV has a long history of highly successful companies being started by dropouts and other kinds of "miscreants". which is basically to say, after being (rightfully, i think) enamored with silicon valley's love of ability over credentials... why go back to just cargo-culting over credentials? > And if those other communities have a history of systemic oppression, poorly funded school districts, legal bias against them, etc, fix that too. to me, that's what diversity initiatives and hard discussions like this are part of: fixing the effects of historic systemic oppression. lots of other fronts on which that can be attacked, but no reason not to try to do it here too.

coldtea 9y ago
>what if it's missing candidates that could do the job? what if the filter is using metrics that aren't actually the best proxy for what we're trying to optimize? That's for the company to decide, and not "wrong". At worst, it might be ineffective. >to me, that's what diversity initiatives and hard discussions like this are part of: fixing the effects of historic systemic oppression. For me they try to fix at the wrong level (like using a bandage to stop internal bleeding instead of fixing the cause) and thus cause more problems than they solve.
- danso 9y ago
  What kind of causes do you think they could fix at this level?
  - coldtea 9y ago
    At the hiring level? If two candidates have equal technical skills, color shouldn't matter at all, and "cultural fit" BS should not play a role.
    - danso 9y ago
      OK, but this situation literally never exists in the real world. Even if two candidates have 10 years of professional Python experience, there is going to be a more granular metric you use to figure out who has more technical skill. Maybe candidate A has more experience in Python 2.7 -- what Google still uses primarily for internal Python, and so candidate A gets hired. But nothing in life is that simple. What if Candidate B has just 1 year less experience in Python 2.7x, and Candidate A has a domestic violence felony on their record? What is the optimal, objective decision then? Or consider a less dramatic example of "cultural" issues. Candidate A has 11 years in Python experience, Candidate B has 10 years. But Candidate A casually throws around the phrase "bitch work" and uses "faggy" and "retarded" as synonyms for "unfair" and "stupid", but is otherwise just as decent a person as B (however that is objectively measured). And let's imagine that this doesn't actually violate any HR policies. Is it objectively correct to hire Candidate A on the basis of technical achievement? What if Candidate A is going to work with a female boss and several engineers who are LGBT? You think that Candidate A's extra year of Python experience objectively outweighs the damage that he would do team cohesion? I'll humor you with your unrealistic scenario: OK, 2 completely equal candidates. And I'm playing devil's advocate for the diversity folks. You think that diversity advocates -- all things being exactly equal -- are obligated by their philosophy to choose the black candidate on the basis of being black? I sure as hell wouldn't make that rationalization, because that fits the legal definition of discrimination. Someone who is a diversity advocate can also be someone who isn't a federal law violator. So how would I resolve it? Flip a coin -- that's no more absurd a solution than the entire scenario in the first place. What would be your hypothetical solution?
      - coldtea 9y ago
        >So how would I resolve it? Flip a coin -- that's no more absurd a solution than the entire scenario in the first place. What would be your hypothetical solution? If the 2 candidates are completely equal, then sure, flip a coin. Many managers do something like it already, even if it's just to hire among e.g. white candidates. Besides, the examples I find somewhat contrived. How about "fuck team cohesion" which is a euphemism for "hiring like-minded hipsters/brogrammers/etc", and just get the technically better programmer (or flip coin if equal). The team can cohese itself just fine. At worst, those others in the team, will have to learn that society is not just people who behave and talk just like them, but all kinds. That's an even better boost to real diversity (not just race/gender diversity, but diversity of opinions and character traits and walks-of-life, which matter even more).

coldtea 9y ago

>what if it's missing candidates that could do the job? what if the filter is using metrics that aren't actually the best proxy for what we're trying to optimize? That's for the company to decide, and not "wrong". At worst, it might be ineffective. >to me, that's what diversity initiatives and hard discussions like this are part of: fixing the effects of historic systemic oppression. For me they try to fix at the wrong level (like using a bandage to stop internal bleeding instead of fixing the cause) and thus cause more problems than they solve.

danso 9y ago
What kind of causes do you think they could fix at this level?
- coldtea 9y ago
  At the hiring level? If two candidates have equal technical skills, color shouldn't matter at all, and "cultural fit" BS should not play a role.
  - danso 9y ago
    OK, but this situation literally never exists in the real world. Even if two candidates have 10 years of professional Python experience, there is going to be a more granular metric you use to figure out who has more technical skill. Maybe candidate A has more experience in Python 2.7 -- what Google still uses primarily for internal Python, and so candidate A gets hired. But nothing in life is that simple. What if Candidate B has just 1 year less experience in Python 2.7x, and Candidate A has a domestic violence felony on their record? What is the optimal, objective decision then? Or consider a less dramatic example of "cultural" issues. Candidate A has 11 years in Python experience, Candidate B has 10 years. But Candidate A casually throws around the phrase "bitch work" and uses "faggy" and "retarded" as synonyms for "unfair" and "stupid", but is otherwise just as decent a person as B (however that is objectively measured). And let's imagine that this doesn't actually violate any HR policies. Is it objectively correct to hire Candidate A on the basis of technical achievement? What if Candidate A is going to work with a female boss and several engineers who are LGBT? You think that Candidate A's extra year of Python experience objectively outweighs the damage that he would do team cohesion? I'll humor you with your unrealistic scenario: OK, 2 completely equal candidates. And I'm playing devil's advocate for the diversity folks. You think that diversity advocates -- all things being exactly equal -- are obligated by their philosophy to choose the black candidate on the basis of being black? I sure as hell wouldn't make that rationalization, because that fits the legal definition of discrimination. Someone who is a diversity advocate can also be someone who isn't a federal law violator. So how would I resolve it? Flip a coin -- that's no more absurd a solution than the entire scenario in the first place. What would be your hypothetical solution?
    - coldtea 9y ago
      >So how would I resolve it? Flip a coin -- that's no more absurd a solution than the entire scenario in the first place. What would be your hypothetical solution? If the 2 candidates are completely equal, then sure, flip a coin. Many managers do something like it already, even if it's just to hire among e.g. white candidates. Besides, the examples I find somewhat contrived. How about "fuck team cohesion" which is a euphemism for "hiring like-minded hipsters/brogrammers/etc", and just get the technically better programmer (or flip coin if equal). The team can cohese itself just fine. At worst, those others in the team, will have to learn that society is not just people who behave and talk just like them, but all kinds. That's an even better boost to real diversity (not just race/gender diversity, but diversity of opinions and character traits and walks-of-life, which matter even more).