5 ms·
This is caused simply and merely by the absurd infringement of freedom of association that prevails nowadays. The fact is, you're never ever ever going to stop
by epicgiga 7y ago
This is caused simply and merely by the absurd infringement of freedom of association that prevails nowadays.
The fact is, you're never ever ever going to stop racists and sexists from not hiring people outside their race and sex because of your laws. All that will happen is precisely this: absurd levels of secrecy, which hurt those weakest in society: those just trying to get a job so they can afford to eat and not sleep under a bridge.
Even if they literally say "we don't want to hire you because you're white, and we want to hire an asian", at least you now know it wasn't because of your skills, so you don't lose confidence, and instead know it was just because they were racist assholes. Under the current regime, they're still racist assholes, but you'll never know.
What we need is a bonfire of 90% of the statutes on the books, which will never happen, so this treatment of candidates will continue, while our respective countries wait for others to overtake them.
What we need is a massive renovation, resurgence, and uptake of unions, across the board, not only to remove these matters from statutes and move them into contracts (forced fair by force of numbers), but to enforce an organic defence of workers, everything from a war against noncompetes and similar oppression, through to clauses like "you'll tell our members specifically why you rejected them on interviews, or else you'll really really regret it...".
- dang 7y agoPlease stop using HN for ideological flamewar. It's not what this site is for. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- epicgiga 7y agoAlright, but at the same time, HN is letting through fundamentally political articles, such as the "How ‘big law’ makes big money" one, which isn't even tangentially related to tech. When HN does so, and concurrently says that's not OK material because it baits flames, how are we supposed to know the limits of our public participation as commenters, with those conflicting messages? If an article is technical, people will tend to respond technically; if the article is political (in this case, at its root: industrial relations), people will tend to respond politically.
- dang 7y agoHN is for more than "tech". That's in the first paragraph of the site guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html. Inevitably, there is political overlap in many of the articles that get posted here—some more, some less. But when there's more, it's particularly important that people stay within the spirit of the site and avoid posting in the flamewar style. Note this rule: "Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html You're right that it's a tricky situation to navigate when some political topics are allowed, and yet we're still trying to have discussion that doesn't degenerate. I've written a lot in the past about how we approach this. Maybe take a look? If you have questions that I haven't already answered in there somewhere, I'd like to know what they are. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20overlap%20politic&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...