3 ms·

Wow, huh, my comment was down-voted. My theory is that innate talent (if there is such a thing) is probably roughly evenly distributed among the sexes and race

Wow, huh, my comment was down-voted. My theory is that innate talent (if there is such a thing) is probably roughly evenly distributed among the sexes and races, so in fields which are dominated by white men, you're actually at an advantage if you manage to hire women and/or minorities as you are able to hire some of the very best humans effectively at an enormous discount (of course, if everyone did this, the discount would disappear and we'd have meritocratic equality, which is kind of what we want). Plus it increases the solution space you're able to efficiently explore due to a wider range of perspective and background. I have had several women bosses, and they're pretty much all great. We'll know when we've achieved gender equality when it's just as common to have a crappy female boss as a male boss. Oh, and folks suggesting we look at "objective" metrics alone... Well, there's no such thing. When hiring folks, there's an enormous amount of information that just can't be known at the time. You really do have to look at the outcome to judge how "objective" you're actually being, on net. . "Am I pretty much just hiring people who look like me?" There's two answers to that question: "Well, obviously people who look like me are naturally better than everyone else." Or, my perspective: "I'm probably missing something important so I should cast a wider net."

erikpukinskis 8y ago
I share your theory. Which points to a business opportunity creating diversity-friendly companies. The trouble is, the world is still sexist and racist. So while you’d end up with a more capable workforce, your company would also be disadvantaged at every turn. Your sales people would be looked over by clients, your bizdev reps would be disrespected by partners, etc. I think to exploit your insight profitably, you need to create an n-sided market of many companies all committed to diversity. That opens you to other attacks, like how the Black Panthers were infiltrated by the CIA for trying to build a black separatist economy. N-sided market problems are also really hard. Although I think this one can be solved with some clever software infrastructure. Once we start seeing some really capable “Ubers of Everything” these kinds of people plays become more feasible.
belorn 8y ago
> probably roughly evenly distributed among the sexes and races While some studies disagree, we can assume its true for the sake for discussion. > so in fields which are dominated by white men, you're actually at an advantage if you manage to hire women and/or minorities as you are able to hire some of the very best humans effectively at an enormous discount There is a logical error here. The assumption is that the missing non-white men in the evenly distributed population would not be working. Instead what we see in countries like Sweden is that people segregate, so you got the non-white men dominating some fields, and white men dominating other fields, and so forth. A field which is dominated by white men that want non-white men has to compete with fields that are dominated by non-white men. Similar, there is no discount to get white men into fields that are dominated by non-white men because they have to compete with fields that are dominated by white men. > if everyone did this, the discount would disappear and we'd have meritocratic equality Logical error #2. If everything was equal we would not see every field being exactly 50% men and women, with exact race distribution as proportional to the population. Randomness would still apply. Unless the population is infinitive you will get random variation.

erikpukinskis 8y ago

I share your theory. Which points to a business opportunity creating diversity-friendly companies. The trouble is, the world is still sexist and racist. So while you’d end up with a more capable workforce, your company would also be disadvantaged at every turn. Your sales people would be looked over by clients, your bizdev reps would be disrespected by partners, etc. I think to exploit your insight profitably, you need to create an n-sided market of many companies all committed to diversity. That opens you to other attacks, like how the Black Panthers were infiltrated by the CIA for trying to build a black separatist economy. N-sided market problems are also really hard. Although I think this one can be solved with some clever software infrastructure. Once we start seeing some really capable “Ubers of Everything” these kinds of people plays become more feasible.

belorn 8y ago

> probably roughly evenly distributed among the sexes and races While some studies disagree, we can assume its true for the sake for discussion. > so in fields which are dominated by white men, you're actually at an advantage if you manage to hire women and/or minorities as you are able to hire some of the very best humans effectively at an enormous discount There is a logical error here. The assumption is that the missing non-white men in the evenly distributed population would not be working. Instead what we see in countries like Sweden is that people segregate, so you got the non-white men dominating some fields, and white men dominating other fields, and so forth. A field which is dominated by white men that want non-white men has to compete with fields that are dominated by non-white men. Similar, there is no discount to get white men into fields that are dominated by non-white men because they have to compete with fields that are dominated by white men. > if everyone did this, the discount would disappear and we'd have meritocratic equality Logical error #2. If everything was equal we would not see every field being exactly 50% men and women, with exact race distribution as proportional to the population. Randomness would still apply. Unless the population is infinitive you will get random variation.