5 ms·

The problem is how you gonna find a different hiring pattern to force 50%? Internal training, ok, but are you going to only provide internal training to women?

The problem is how you gonna find a different hiring pattern to force 50%? Internal training, ok, but are you going to only provide internal training to women? Is this even legal? Basecamp training, ok, but are you going to only provide basecamp training to women? Is this even legal? Special talents (dropouts etc.), ok, but are you going to only hire special talents who are women? Is this even legal? Non-traditional education, ok, but are you going to only hire non-traditional education candidates who are women? Is this even legal? The whole idea that there is a social engineering way to make programmers 50% male/female is not based on any facts as we know in a free society. On the contrary, there is evidence that the more gender equal society, the fewer women choose STEM. https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/02/the-more-gender-equality-the-fewer-women-in-stem/553592/ https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/02/the-more... The obsession of 50% is not only anti-science, it is also demeaning to other great contributions women provide to society. Yes, nurses and teachers make less money than programmers, but it does not mean nurses and teachers are less important than programmers. It is because personal caring kind of job is less scalable than STEM jobs, so a team of 10 programmers can provide services to far more people than 10 nurses. Oh, are you going to disagree that caring for people is more a part of female nature than male nature? Are you going to say this is actually a result of society oppressed women and tricked them to care more about others? Because female psychology is exactly the same as male psychology? So maybe we should expect a gender equal society there are 50% male/female in murders and rapists?

hellisothers 7y ago
I agree, 50% is probably an unreasonable goal, I could maybe even see arguing that any percent based goal is a bad goal. The goal should be “enough so those who are feeling disenfranchised don’t anymore” but that might be too squishy :)
- weberc2 7y ago
  That’s a laudable goal, and to that end I imagine it would do a world of good to stop the constant exaggeration of how disenfranchised those groups are (NOTE that I’m not saying these groups are fully enfranchised, only that the disenfranchisement is exaggerated). At some point, advertising tech as a bunch of rapey, Nazi frat bros is probably more offputting than whatever discrimination actually exists. Let’s ditch the boogeyman and see what happens.
  - smartasspolice 7y ago
    The numbers don't exaggerate.
    - weberc2 7y ago
      You’re right: they don’t. They tell us the progressives are exaggerating.
- qbaqbaqba 7y ago
  >feeling Good luck with that. People who profit exploiting "gender gap" like bootcamps, hr firms, speaker agencies, will never be happy.
kmonsen 7y ago
Not saying I know you are wrong, but there are alternative ways we end up in this world. Like that the world of computer engineering is currently full of Brogrammers that females know it is best to stay way clear of. Or that there are countless examples of horrible behavior of men towards woman in computer engineering and perhaps this is affecting the pipeline. We don't know which one of these is true, and perhaps there are even other factors at work. Let's just not pretend that 18% will forever stay like that and that all woman just want to find someone to nurture.
- adamsb6 7y ago
  I’ve worked at a couple of mid-late stage startups and currently at a FAANG and I’ve observed very few engineers that I would put in the “bro” category. I don’t know how this became the stereotype when nerd is still the dominant character class by far. Is it just me? Does anyone find that their workplace is even 50% brogrammer?
  - lowercased 7y ago
    I've worked in a couple of small-mid size companies, and in those cases, while the engineering team themselves wasn't really 'bro'-ish... the management kept trying to introduce that sort of culture, I think as a way to try to get us to ... work more? better? attract newer/younger/cheaper devs?
- lowercased 7y ago
  > Like that the world of computer engineering is currently full of Brogrammers that females know it is best to stay way clear of I'm a middle-aged white male who's been working with software development for 25+ years. I don't like being around the typical dev shop - the culture isn't usually much of a fit (whether 'bro' or 'sci-fi' or 'gamer' oriented), often a focus on 'free beer!' and similar 'perks' - so much so that I stay way clear of most typical software/dev jobs. I can pass in those environments (and have), and it's still uncomfortable for me - it must be 10x worse for people who are that much more 'other'. :/
freddie_mercury 7y ago
Always interesting that on Hacker News, people are always so ready to throw in the towel and call something impossible and list the 83 reasons why. Unless it is about starting a business and making money via ads.... Then they're willing to devote thousand of hours of their life thinking creatively about how to solve problems to "change the world".
- Nasrudith 7y ago
  That sounds like "magic key" cryptodenialist logic. Just because you really want something doesn't make it possible or viable. They do support initiatives to help but realize it is essentially generational at this point.
- thu2111 7y ago
  Lots of people have started businesses and made money via ads, in ways that increased wealth for everyone. Of course people think about how to do that. In contrast nobody has changed the gender ratio in tech without discriminating against men: a zero sum game that definitely does not increase wealth for everyone. As for your dismissal of people's 83 reasons, why not show us how it's done and address them?
  - frenchyatwork 7y ago
    > in ways that increased wealth for everyone It certainly doesn't increase the wealth of people who are persuaded to buy stuff that really isn't worthwhile for them.
    - filoleg 7y ago
      If buying things didn't provide value to people, they wouldn't have bought it. Just because I cannot extract monetary value by buying another MIDI controller for my hobby doesn't mean it isn't a worthwhile purchase. If you derived enjoyment from a purchase, it increased your [non-material] wealth and added value. The same way, Gmail and FB make money by selling ads, but if they didn't exist without ads, it is easily arguable that people would have missed out on a lot of wealth and benefits that comes with those things. I use Gmail, because I extract value from using it. And I pay for it by letting Google personalize my ads and sell them. For me, that exchange is absolutely worth it. If it wasn't, I wouldn't have been using it.

hellisothers 7y ago

I agree, 50% is probably an unreasonable goal, I could maybe even see arguing that any percent based goal is a bad goal. The goal should be “enough so those who are feeling disenfranchised don’t anymore” but that might be too squishy :)

weberc2 7y ago
That’s a laudable goal, and to that end I imagine it would do a world of good to stop the constant exaggeration of how disenfranchised those groups are (NOTE that I’m not saying these groups are fully enfranchised, only that the disenfranchisement is exaggerated). At some point, advertising tech as a bunch of rapey, Nazi frat bros is probably more offputting than whatever discrimination actually exists. Let’s ditch the boogeyman and see what happens.
- smartasspolice 7y ago
  The numbers don't exaggerate.
  - weberc2 7y ago
    You’re right: they don’t. They tell us the progressives are exaggerating.
qbaqbaqba 7y ago
>feeling Good luck with that. People who profit exploiting "gender gap" like bootcamps, hr firms, speaker agencies, will never be happy.

kmonsen 7y ago

Not saying I know you are wrong, but there are alternative ways we end up in this world. Like that the world of computer engineering is currently full of Brogrammers that females know it is best to stay way clear of. Or that there are countless examples of horrible behavior of men towards woman in computer engineering and perhaps this is affecting the pipeline. We don't know which one of these is true, and perhaps there are even other factors at work. Let's just not pretend that 18% will forever stay like that and that all woman just want to find someone to nurture.

adamsb6 7y ago
I’ve worked at a couple of mid-late stage startups and currently at a FAANG and I’ve observed very few engineers that I would put in the “bro” category. I don’t know how this became the stereotype when nerd is still the dominant character class by far. Is it just me? Does anyone find that their workplace is even 50% brogrammer?
- lowercased 7y ago
  I've worked in a couple of small-mid size companies, and in those cases, while the engineering team themselves wasn't really 'bro'-ish... the management kept trying to introduce that sort of culture, I think as a way to try to get us to ... work more? better? attract newer/younger/cheaper devs?
lowercased 7y ago
> Like that the world of computer engineering is currently full of Brogrammers that females know it is best to stay way clear of I'm a middle-aged white male who's been working with software development for 25+ years. I don't like being around the typical dev shop - the culture isn't usually much of a fit (whether 'bro' or 'sci-fi' or 'gamer' oriented), often a focus on 'free beer!' and similar 'perks' - so much so that I stay way clear of most typical software/dev jobs. I can pass in those environments (and have), and it's still uncomfortable for me - it must be 10x worse for people who are that much more 'other'. :/

freddie_mercury 7y ago

Always interesting that on Hacker News, people are always so ready to throw in the towel and call something impossible and list the 83 reasons why. Unless it is about starting a business and making money via ads.... Then they're willing to devote thousand of hours of their life thinking creatively about how to solve problems to "change the world".

Nasrudith 7y ago
That sounds like "magic key" cryptodenialist logic. Just because you really want something doesn't make it possible or viable. They do support initiatives to help but realize it is essentially generational at this point.
thu2111 7y ago
Lots of people have started businesses and made money via ads, in ways that increased wealth for everyone. Of course people think about how to do that. In contrast nobody has changed the gender ratio in tech without discriminating against men: a zero sum game that definitely does not increase wealth for everyone. As for your dismissal of people's 83 reasons, why not show us how it's done and address them?
- frenchyatwork 7y ago
  > in ways that increased wealth for everyone It certainly doesn't increase the wealth of people who are persuaded to buy stuff that really isn't worthwhile for them.
  - filoleg 7y ago
    If buying things didn't provide value to people, they wouldn't have bought it. Just because I cannot extract monetary value by buying another MIDI controller for my hobby doesn't mean it isn't a worthwhile purchase. If you derived enjoyment from a purchase, it increased your [non-material] wealth and added value. The same way, Gmail and FB make money by selling ads, but if they didn't exist without ads, it is easily arguable that people would have missed out on a lot of wealth and benefits that comes with those things. I use Gmail, because I extract value from using it. And I pay for it by letting Google personalize my ads and sell them. For me, that exchange is absolutely worth it. If it wasn't, I wouldn't have been using it.