5 ms·

They have been at the university for nearly 20 years and are 75 and 80 years old respectively. At first I was impressed that some professors were making huge s

They have been at the university for nearly 20 years and are 75 and 80 years old respectively. At first I was impressed that some professors were making huge sacrifices standing up for what they believe. But at age 75 and 80, they aren't really risking any sort of career or financial stability. I'd like to give them the benefit of the doubt, but it is hard not to feel like maybe they just saw a convenient moment to try to make a statement when they were about to retire anyway?

beat 8y ago
In the letter, they do address that the problems leading to their resignation are recent.
- rwcarlsen 8y ago
  I saw that - but in their position I would be much more likely to do seemingly drastic things to send a message that I otherwise would not be willing to do if I had more to lose. To me, what they have done by resigning is not more significant than someone young in their career simply speaking out. It is commendable that they spoke out, but I don't see the resignations as adding much punch.
  - PAClearner 8y ago
    idk man they are hugely famous in computer science and are also both renowned for being very kind and well known in the community. they aren't randos getting in a fight with their department. they are academic royalty so their actions are by default assigned a lot of credibility. as a someone in graduate school for computer science [not cmu] I find this shocking and am INTENSELY curious about the details. hard to imagine a more effective resignation. imagine if steve jobs resigned from apple because the boards was being sexist or something-I think that resignation would get a LOT of attention. that might be sorta similar to this situation.
    - rwcarlsen 8y ago
      I personally choose to place more emphasis on the sacrifices of individuals than on their position of prominence when determining how important an issue is. I would personally find an average-joe resignation more interesting than one from anyone who had much less to lose in terms of livelihood.
      - PAClearner 8y ago
        I was sorta thinking about like raw empirical impact ya know? like normative vs descriptive.
        rwcarlsen 8y ago
        I'm more after looking for ways to get a qualitative feel for how big a deal the issues are that caused them to resign rather than how big an impact their resignation is. But I guess it seems the HN community has pigeon-holed me here and prevented me from getting much discussion about things. Maybe another day :-/
        rectang 8y ago
        I think the reason you're taking fire is that your posts have questioned the sincerity and commitment of the Blums. Many people on HN would rather assume good intent, for two reasons. First, because of their gravitas as prestigious researchers. (I'm actually a bit uncomfortable about that -- most people who experience gender discrimination haven't won Turing Awards, but we should still listen to them.) Second, because sticking your neck out about gender issues guarantees a ferocious response and will make your life hell, so nobody does it whimsically. So what if they're not 35? Doing this at 75/80 is still incredibly unpleasant. Like I said in my other post, I think we as members of the public do not have enough information to pass judgment. But if the Blums choose to say more, I hope we will all give them a fair hearing.
        PAClearner 8y ago
perfmode 8y ago
Why would this be the most likely scenario? What would motivate someone to end their career in this way?
- rwcarlsen 8y ago
  They have principles and wanted to make a statement. But like I said in a different reply - my default interpretation of this given the circumstances would be not considering this as more significant than someone earlier in their career simply speaking out. Would they have resigned if they were only 35? maybe - and that would (to me) be stronger evidence of how bad the things were that they were protesting. And maybe not (this would be my guess, but I could certainly be wrong).
  - saltcured 8y ago
    I would also consider that they want to cancel out any sense of their late-career presence being an endorsement of a place or practices they find unacceptable. One might almost hear a tinge of regret that they aren't retiring now with a nice party at UC Berkeley....
  - yodon 8y ago
    We get it. You're saying the same thing over and over. You do presumably realize that, being 70, they have no way of pushing a button and suddenly being 35 to pass your apparently magical test of significance to their actions. Given that as smart as they are they can't invent an age reducing time machine but they did encounter what they consider to be serious issues at the institution where they worked in their 70's and did not encounter similar serious issues where they worked in their 30's, what exactly would you have them do that passes your personal threshold of significance test for their actions?
uRreading2slow 8y ago
Why does something you imagined that wouldn't really add anything worthwhile not being the case take away from it? Good on them that their careers cannot be hindered for this; not everybody doing what they feel is right has to "sacrifice" something for it, it's much better when it's all throwing off burdens and reaping rewards. We cannot know what sacrifices they made or didn't make in those 20 years anyway, and what combination of straws broke the camel's back. Maybe they were sick of it for a while, but decided to stick around until retirement for the good people they enjoyed working with and teaching, and then make their statement. I could not blame them for that. And hey, it would have been even more "convenient" to make no statement at all, so there's that. IMO what matters is the statement, just like the content of a comment matters, not if someone is writing it while parachuting, or from a couch.

beat 8y ago

In the letter, they do address that the problems leading to their resignation are recent.

rwcarlsen 8y ago
I saw that - but in their position I would be much more likely to do seemingly drastic things to send a message that I otherwise would not be willing to do if I had more to lose. To me, what they have done by resigning is not more significant than someone young in their career simply speaking out. It is commendable that they spoke out, but I don't see the resignations as adding much punch.
- PAClearner 8y ago
  idk man they are hugely famous in computer science and are also both renowned for being very kind and well known in the community. they aren't randos getting in a fight with their department. they are academic royalty so their actions are by default assigned a lot of credibility. as a someone in graduate school for computer science [not cmu] I find this shocking and am INTENSELY curious about the details. hard to imagine a more effective resignation. imagine if steve jobs resigned from apple because the boards was being sexist or something-I think that resignation would get a LOT of attention. that might be sorta similar to this situation.
  - rwcarlsen 8y ago
    I personally choose to place more emphasis on the sacrifices of individuals than on their position of prominence when determining how important an issue is. I would personally find an average-joe resignation more interesting than one from anyone who had much less to lose in terms of livelihood.
    - PAClearner 8y ago
      I was sorta thinking about like raw empirical impact ya know? like normative vs descriptive.
      - rwcarlsen 8y ago
        I'm more after looking for ways to get a qualitative feel for how big a deal the issues are that caused them to resign rather than how big an impact their resignation is. But I guess it seems the HN community has pigeon-holed me here and prevented me from getting much discussion about things. Maybe another day :-/
        rectang 8y ago
        I think the reason you're taking fire is that your posts have questioned the sincerity and commitment of the Blums. Many people on HN would rather assume good intent, for two reasons. First, because of their gravitas as prestigious researchers. (I'm actually a bit uncomfortable about that -- most people who experience gender discrimination haven't won Turing Awards, but we should still listen to them.) Second, because sticking your neck out about gender issues guarantees a ferocious response and will make your life hell, so nobody does it whimsically. So what if they're not 35? Doing this at 75/80 is still incredibly unpleasant. Like I said in my other post, I think we as members of the public do not have enough information to pass judgment. But if the Blums choose to say more, I hope we will all give them a fair hearing.
        PAClearner 8y ago

perfmode 8y ago

Why would this be the most likely scenario? What would motivate someone to end their career in this way?

rwcarlsen 8y ago
They have principles and wanted to make a statement. But like I said in a different reply - my default interpretation of this given the circumstances would be not considering this as more significant than someone earlier in their career simply speaking out. Would they have resigned if they were only 35? maybe - and that would (to me) be stronger evidence of how bad the things were that they were protesting. And maybe not (this would be my guess, but I could certainly be wrong).
- saltcured 8y ago
  I would also consider that they want to cancel out any sense of their late-career presence being an endorsement of a place or practices they find unacceptable. One might almost hear a tinge of regret that they aren't retiring now with a nice party at UC Berkeley....
- yodon 8y ago
  We get it. You're saying the same thing over and over. You do presumably realize that, being 70, they have no way of pushing a button and suddenly being 35 to pass your apparently magical test of significance to their actions. Given that as smart as they are they can't invent an age reducing time machine but they did encounter what they consider to be serious issues at the institution where they worked in their 70's and did not encounter similar serious issues where they worked in their 30's, what exactly would you have them do that passes your personal threshold of significance test for their actions?

uRreading2slow 8y ago

Why does something you imagined that wouldn't really add anything worthwhile not being the case take away from it? Good on them that their careers cannot be hindered for this; not everybody doing what they feel is right has to "sacrifice" something for it, it's much better when it's all throwing off burdens and reaping rewards. We cannot know what sacrifices they made or didn't make in those 20 years anyway, and what combination of straws broke the camel's back. Maybe they were sick of it for a while, but decided to stick around until retirement for the good people they enjoyed working with and teaching, and then make their statement. I could not blame them for that. And hey, it would have been even more "convenient" to make no statement at all, so there's that. IMO what matters is the statement, just like the content of a comment matters, not if someone is writing it while parachuting, or from a couch.