4 ms·

I worked at Google, and if racism is present in the hiring process, it's to the benefit of minorities. Google would (at least during my time there) jump through

I worked at Google, and if racism is present in the hiring process, it's to the benefit of minorities. Google would (at least during my time there) jump through a lot of hoops give POCs and women on-site interviews, and the review process was scrubbed of racial information. Many employees took it upon themselves to avoid using gendered language in their reviews as well, to avoid that possibly playing a role. That being said, over the course of ~50 on-site interviews I conducted there, only 2 were Black, and they were both from Africa, not the United States. The reality is, African Americans are woefully under represented in computer science well upstream of companies that would love to hire them. Even if you assume all corporations are evil, hiring more POCs would be in their best interest at this point just to avoid lawsuits and to have better optics.

rayiner 6y ago
So VCs pass the buck to Google, and Google passes the buck to universities. And universities presumably pass the buck to K-12 education, and the whole thing circles back to an abstract debate about “fixing the educational system” (which we have been trying to do for decades with zero results). Do you see why people are mad?
- tomp 6y ago
  > Do you see why people are mad? Because it's an extremely hard problem, and it's easier to be abstractly mad and hope someone else solves it, than to come up with concrete practical effective solutions?
  - rayiner 6y ago
    “Fix the educational system and hope disparities resolve themselves” is not a “concrete practical effective solution.” It’s a cop out.
  - tptacek 6y ago
    Other industries faced similar problems and materially improved representation. Ours steadfastly refuses, and instead comes up with increasingly silly special pleadings. The last CS gender debate I saw devolved to an argument about the behavior of monkeys in laboratories. People saying there isn't a problem in the industry are making an extraordinary claim, and pretending otherwise.
    - harryh 6y ago
      At least some other industries with problems (law, medicine) have an oversupply of practitioners that is limited by cartel behavior. This does make this problem a bit more tractable.
      - tptacek 6y ago
        I think that's a fair point! There needs to be a sustained effort across the board, I think; the solution will be iterated, and involve continued lifts both from the labor supply and the demand side of industry. What worries me is that we have a coordination problem, and if you snipe at efforts to make employers retain more URMs, you're damaging the case for the pipeline to supply more URMs.
    - tomp 6y ago
      Ours in an industry with extremely low barriers to entry (you don't even need a degree!), no formal credentialism and therefore much more meritocratic, but on the other hand without the enhanced social status of say law or medicine. I'm not entirely sure where I'm going with this point, or if it has any relevance on the representation, but suffice to say, you can't really compare it with "other" (probably law & medicine, not trucking & nursing) industries that are invariably completely different.
      - tptacek 6y ago
        Most practitioners in our industry are fed to it through the university pipeline. It's not interesting to this particular discussion to note that the pipeline can be bypassed by especially motivated people, because it's the task of the industry to make sure that URMs don't need to clear a higher bar for motivation and resourcefulness than the median practitioner does.
        deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
    - nradov 6y ago
  - pnako 6y ago
    Here's a concrete, practical solution: Radical affirmative action. Not radical in the rioting / revolution understanding of the word, but in its application. So, if the issue with systematic racism is such that it endangers the foundational core of American society, it's time to take a big risk: literally pull random people to sit on VC and companies boards, in skilled jobs, etc. (a bit like the Diversity Visa Lottery the US already does for immigration). And train them on the job. Sure, there will be issues here and there, but it would definitely solve the issue once and for all. It wouldn't even have to be explicitly racial. If it's truly random, you would end up with an accurate representation of the population. It would also desegregate schools and neighborhoods, too, because with such a disruption people would have to move to match their new jobs. Now, an exception should be made of course for professions where an error would mean life or death (or injury): doctors, airline pilots, etc. But I suspect 95% of careers at least could be desegregated in this way. And perhaps an exception for jobs that truly require special abilities: professor of physics, professional athlete, etc.
    - Apocryphon 6y ago
      That's sortition, baby!
      - pnako 6y ago
        Indeed. We also use this logic for juries.
- BobbyJo 6y ago
  If you want to label 'not having much power or responsibility' as 'passing the buck' that's your prerogative, but poo colored glasses hide reality just as well as the rose colored kind. If they're striving to create equal opportunity for their employees, then Google is doing everything they have a responsibility to do in my book.

rayiner 6y ago

So VCs pass the buck to Google, and Google passes the buck to universities. And universities presumably pass the buck to K-12 education, and the whole thing circles back to an abstract debate about “fixing the educational system” (which we have been trying to do for decades with zero results). Do you see why people are mad?

tomp 6y ago
> Do you see why people are mad? Because it's an extremely hard problem, and it's easier to be abstractly mad and hope someone else solves it, than to come up with concrete practical effective solutions?
- rayiner 6y ago
  “Fix the educational system and hope disparities resolve themselves” is not a “concrete practical effective solution.” It’s a cop out.
- tptacek 6y ago
  Other industries faced similar problems and materially improved representation. Ours steadfastly refuses, and instead comes up with increasingly silly special pleadings. The last CS gender debate I saw devolved to an argument about the behavior of monkeys in laboratories. People saying there isn't a problem in the industry are making an extraordinary claim, and pretending otherwise.
  - harryh 6y ago
    At least some other industries with problems (law, medicine) have an oversupply of practitioners that is limited by cartel behavior. This does make this problem a bit more tractable.
    - tptacek 6y ago
      I think that's a fair point! There needs to be a sustained effort across the board, I think; the solution will be iterated, and involve continued lifts both from the labor supply and the demand side of industry. What worries me is that we have a coordination problem, and if you snipe at efforts to make employers retain more URMs, you're damaging the case for the pipeline to supply more URMs.
  - tomp 6y ago
    Ours in an industry with extremely low barriers to entry (you don't even need a degree!), no formal credentialism and therefore much more meritocratic, but on the other hand without the enhanced social status of say law or medicine. I'm not entirely sure where I'm going with this point, or if it has any relevance on the representation, but suffice to say, you can't really compare it with "other" (probably law & medicine, not trucking & nursing) industries that are invariably completely different.
    - tptacek 6y ago
      Most practitioners in our industry are fed to it through the university pipeline. It's not interesting to this particular discussion to note that the pipeline can be bypassed by especially motivated people, because it's the task of the industry to make sure that URMs don't need to clear a higher bar for motivation and resourcefulness than the median practitioner does.
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
  - nradov 6y ago
- pnako 6y ago
  Here's a concrete, practical solution: Radical affirmative action. Not radical in the rioting / revolution understanding of the word, but in its application. So, if the issue with systematic racism is such that it endangers the foundational core of American society, it's time to take a big risk: literally pull random people to sit on VC and companies boards, in skilled jobs, etc. (a bit like the Diversity Visa Lottery the US already does for immigration). And train them on the job. Sure, there will be issues here and there, but it would definitely solve the issue once and for all. It wouldn't even have to be explicitly racial. If it's truly random, you would end up with an accurate representation of the population. It would also desegregate schools and neighborhoods, too, because with such a disruption people would have to move to match their new jobs. Now, an exception should be made of course for professions where an error would mean life or death (or injury): doctors, airline pilots, etc. But I suspect 95% of careers at least could be desegregated in this way. And perhaps an exception for jobs that truly require special abilities: professor of physics, professional athlete, etc.
  - Apocryphon 6y ago
    That's sortition, baby!
    - pnako 6y ago
      Indeed. We also use this logic for juries.
BobbyJo 6y ago
If you want to label 'not having much power or responsibility' as 'passing the buck' that's your prerogative, but poo colored glasses hide reality just as well as the rose colored kind. If they're striving to create equal opportunity for their employees, then Google is doing everything they have a responsibility to do in my book.