3 ms·
> attempt to balance the scales That is actually imbalance you are seeking. For example if 90% of people in a domain are of race X, then unbiased selection *s
by foobarbaz33 5y ago
> attempt to balance the scales
That is actually imbalance you are seeking.
For example if 90% of people in a domain are of race X, then unbiased selection *should* select 90% of race X. Assuming the perceived investment opportunity is evenly distributed between all people.
- genewitch 5y agoMy point is the "domain" itself may be biased, and you won't know that if you go "well, 90% of the people applying are X, so that's what we're going to do" - perhaps the domain would be more heterogeneous but the non-X don't know anything about YC, VC, etc. There's lots of incredibly smart and savvy people on the planet. Eschewing them because "statistics" or "demographics" is, as i said, lazy.
- foobarbaz33 5y ago> the "domain" itself may be biased I agree there. If you grow up in a chaotic country where survival is your main concern, it is less likely you will be involved with creating new technology. > Eschewing them because "statistics" or "demographics" is, as i said, lazy. Having fair and unbiased selection on your pool of applicants is not "Eschewing" anyone. I'd say that claim is lazy.