6 ms·

All of the inclusivity movements that have happened in my workplace have involved hiring people unfit to do their job. I don't care what your background is, I c

All of the inclusivity movements that have happened in my workplace have involved hiring people unfit to do their job. I don't care what your background is, I care what you bring to the table. The issue around unfettered inclusivity is that it enables grifters to gain positions of power based purely on superficial elements that they possess. The original meaning of diversity was "diversity of thought" -- it has been co-opted to mean something totally different.

thumbuddy 3y ago
[flagged]
- TeMPOraL 3y ago
  I doubt they're anti-diversity, but bringing up this topic in context of RMS and FSF is a bit rich, given the high-profile character assassination attempt directed at RMS, in not so distant past. Free software ecosystem hasn't fully recovered from that yet.
  - sneak 3y ago
    The attacks on rms have been wholly based on what he actually said, not character assassination. rms seems to forget that people will read not the words you write, but what they interpret you to be driving at based on the words you write. They took this to mean he was defending pedophilia (when in fact he wrote no such thing, being both neurodivergent and precise). This is rms' fault for being bad at PR whilst being a public figure and leader.
    - bombolo 3y ago
      He said epstin is a serial rapist, but that wasn't really emphasized.
    - TeMPOraL 3y ago
      > The attacks on rms have been wholly based on what he actually said, not character assassination. They weren't. The things he actually said played a minor role in that kerfuffle - it all started with a lot of smears thrown at RMS by a person with some grudge. Additional quotes came later, as people started fishing for them. > rms seems to forget that people will read not the words you write, but what they interpret you to be driving at based on the words you write. They took this to mean he was defending pedophilia (when in fact he wrote no such thing, being both neurodivergent and precise). Why exactly are you defending people being irrational or engaging in power plays? You note yourself what the facts were, so why justify mistaking them? > This is rms' fault for being bad at PR whilst being a public figure and leader. RMS was doing fine until someone decided to destroy him for personal gain. Do you expect every person doing something interesting in a niche community should behave like a Hollywood celebrity or a politician, having their communications managed by teams of spindoctors, on the off chance someone wants to destroy them and picks mass media as their weapon of choice?
      - sneak 3y ago
        > RMS was doing fine until someone decided to destroy him for personal gain. He was not destroyed, literally or figuratively. If that is the basis of your claim, then everything else based upon that has no supporting evidence. Who do you assert yielded personal gain, and how? I saw nothing of the sort.
    - RobotToaster 3y ago
      It's interesting how people will claim to be pro diversity, then say it's someone's fault for communicating in an autistic way.
      - cassianoleal 3y ago
        Diversity, but only the kind I'm comfortable with.
      - sneak 3y ago
        https://xkcd.com/1984/ https://xkcd.com/1984/ He's bad at communicating. It may be because he's autistic, but ultimately that part is not relevant. The way humans in bulk receive public communications is a fact of nature; it would be like someone swimming in the ocean and drowning and saying that it was bad that the ocean couldn't accept their style of swimming. He's a public figure and certain actions undertaken by public figures when communicating with millions of people are bad. He undertook those actions and suffered the negative consequences. It's ultimately not related to his neurodivergence; there are autistic people who don't make huge PR blunders.
  - fullspectrumdev 3y ago
    > high-profile character assassination attempt people pointing out that what the man said and did was fucked is somehow a character assassination attempt? Literally none of the factual claims of “RMS said X” have been false, it’s pretty much all been on the record.
    - mandmandam 3y ago
      Vice put out one of the most blatantly false and disgusting smear jobs in recent history [0]. You're defending the indefensible - why? 0 - https://stallmansupport.org/debunking-false-accusations-against-richard-stallman.html https://stallmansupport.org/debunking-false-accusations-agai... (with links to primary sources throughout).
    - TeMPOraL 3y ago
      > Literally none of the factual claims of “RMS said X” have been false, it’s pretty much all been on the record. On the contrary, literally every single claim about what RMS said or did was fabricated, or pulled out of context so badly you could still see the severed threads trailing behind. The original posts and subsequent press articles were one big patchwork of lies and manipulative statements; this was all trivial to verify and apparent to anyone except those who, for some reason, really wanted to believe it's true.
      - Arnt 3y ago
        Literally every single claim. That includes https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26708993 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26708993 then, so go on, tell all about how that was fabricated or pulled out of context.
      - ryandrake 3y ago
        And even if it wasn't fabricated, it's still character assassination. Look, if you take any public figure, and spend enough time looking through all the things they ever written or said in their lives, you can probably find some terrible thing to paint them as a terrible person. Someone could be a role model, have a lifetime of charitable work and positive achievements, bbbbbbut years ago they once said they didn't like gay people (or whatever), all of a sudden none of their achievements matter and they're actually monsters! Any of us with a long posting history on the Internet probably at one time said something that wasn't nice. Cherry picking that one thing and holding it up as the summation of who we are, is character assassination.
  - pyrale 3y ago
    > Free software ecosystem hasn't fully recovered from that yet. That's what happens when you put all your eggs into one basket, and then realize that basket had a hole. Maybe free software would be better off if the FSF had spent time building a resilient movement rather than a church to RMS.
- faangsticle 3y ago
  What kind of nonsense reply is this? What in the previous comment lead you to believe they never experienced diversity? They only commented on the impact of their workplace by incompetent managers, which is a very common experience.
- isitmadeofglass 3y ago
  > The guy is on video eating skin off his goddam toes while lecturing CS. If that dude or any of his followers are antidiversity, they need to look themself in the mirror. He is a white male who’s in power despite eating toe gunk, while also supporting an environment hostile to woman. He’s in no way a good representation of diversity simply because he’s odd.
- davidguetta 3y ago
  > Diversity is important For what exactly ? There are countless examples of compagny who innovated or succedded well while everyone being the same race / gender (cf microsoft / apple in the 1990s or literally any china compagny right now). I do enjoy diversity at work because I don't like when all my peers look / think / speak the same, but it's not exactly "important" beside my personal enjoyment
  - dralley 3y ago
    And there are countless examples of a company that caused serious damage by not being diverse, see as an example the introduction of seatbelts and airbags that were designed by and tested for men and male-sized dummies, and not women or children.
    - davidguetta 3y ago
      Lets hire children then so they can advise on security issues><. My point is Its a huge unproven assumption that diversity would have magically solved that problem.
c0nfused 3y ago
[flagged]
- azangru 3y ago
  How (or why) do you read "I don't care what your background is, I care what you bring to the table" as "women and minorities suck at their jobs"? OP doesn't say who sucks at their jobs; he says that whoever they are, be they men, women, minorities, or majorities, he doesn't want them.
- caeril 3y ago
  There's a bit more nuance to this than "minorities suck at their jobs". Let's say I have two candidates, one is asian and the other is black, and on paper they both look great. They both attended Harvard, and they both interviewed well. Now if I know that the average SAT score required for Asians to be admitted to Harvard is 1580, and the average SAT score required for Blacks to be admitted to Harvard is 1360, and all other metrics (GPA, conscientiousness, work habits, etc) fall along similar lines of differing standards, then I would have a statistical bias toward selecting the Asian candidate. Not because I'm racist, but because DEI and other equity efforts at Harvard have pre-biased the candidate pool for me. In the absence of equity efforts, "I went to Harvard" would be a metric that stands on its own, independent of race. But with DEI, it is not. We have eliminated the "I hate them damn blacks" style of racism and replaced it with a more insidious "In order to make a statistically correct decision, I need to be biased against Blacks" style of racism. I'm not sure this is an improvement. This is an example from college admissions, but the same analogy can be drawn in any environment with strong DEI influence.
  - ckemere 3y ago
    Yet somehow in the pre-affirmative action era you never factored in the fact that white legacy applicants have similar (low) SAT requirements?
  - bombolo 3y ago
    They "went to" or also graduated there? If they graduated, their high school score doesn't matter.
dtech 3y ago
You seem to trigger on "diversity" and immediately go into a - slightly troubling if you ask me - rant. Diversity means "diverse group of opinion on free software" in this context, not necessarily "diverse group of humans".
isitmadeofglass 3y ago
[dead]
mschuster91 3y ago
> I don't care what your background is, I care what you bring to the table. The problem is that there will always be biases in hiring, "meritocracy" is a myth. It has been shown numerous times (e.g. [1]) that there is a significant bias towards men even if male and female candidates are equal, with the most decisive bias being an assumption that women may not be willing/able to work longer hours. Besides, meritocracy is fraught with other issues as well, see e.g. [2][3][4] for more detailed writeups than I could possibly write here in a HN comment. [1] https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/08912432221137910 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/08912432221137... [2] https://insights.som.yale.edu/insights/how-meritocracy-worsens-inequality-and-makes-even-the-rich-miserable https://insights.som.yale.edu/insights/how-meritocracy-worse... [3] https://press.princeton.edu/ideas/a-belief-in-meritocracy-is-not-only-false-its-bad-for-you https://press.princeton.edu/ideas/a-belief-in-meritocracy-is... [4] https://www.noemamag.com/the-dark-side-of-meritocracy/ https://www.noemamag.com/the-dark-side-of-meritocracy/
- blueflow 3y ago
  Noema is a US-based think tank (Berggruen) that does a lot of grievance writings. Take it with a truck of salt, they 100% have undisclosed interests.
mc32 3y ago
Also for the FSF you may not want the kind of diversity of thought that would allow commercial interests to seep in slowly. In some cases you really want inflexible dogmatic people with singular focus carrying the torch.
Eumenes 3y ago
Apple fired its head of DEI for saying they should consider diversity of thought, its cult like behavior - https://techcrunch.com/2017/10/13/apple-diversity-head-denise-young-smith-apologizes-for-controversial-choice-of-words-at-summit/ https://techcrunch.com/2017/10/13/apple-diversity-head-denis...
kryogen1c 3y ago
[flagged]
- lettergram 3y ago
  > A 100% male company isn't going to invent the best tampon I mean… a man did invent tampons https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earle_Haas https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earle_Haas Granted there were previous, less good, versions
  - chabes 3y ago
    How is that relevant?
- JetSetWilly 3y ago
  > If you're concerned about bias in hiring, then eliminate bias. Do blind interviews and redact resumes, broaden your candidate sources. You don't eliminate bias by... introducing bias. The "problem" is that when this purist meritocratic approach has been tried, it results in more white men being hired, not less. Therefore such approaches are swiftly cancelled, in favour of introducing deliberate bias on the basis of superficial characteristics. See here as a good example: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-30/bilnd-recruitment-trial-to-improve-gender-equality-failing-study/8664888 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-30/bilnd-recruitment-tri...
  - baremetal 3y ago
    >The "problem" is that when this purist meritocratic approach has been tried, it results in more white men being hired, not less. What an ignorant and bigoted thing to say. Next your gonna say the same thing about Asians. Meritocracy is blind to race and focuses solely on aptitude. The fact you don't like the outcome says more about you than about meritocracy.
    - JetSetWilly 3y ago
      There's a reason I put the word "problem" in scare quotes.
p4bl0 3y ago
You seem to be missing the point. It is about diversity of thought that I'm talking here. The FSF refused people based on them wanting to be able to disagree with RMS, or to continue to work with local free software groups that at some point criticized RMS return to the FSF board based on how it was orchestrated for example.
- stavros 3y ago
  Yeah, I was going to ask what you meant, you may want to edit your comment to reword it as "dissent" or "diversity of opinion".
  - p4bl0 3y ago
    I cannot edit it anymore, sorry :/.
    - stavros 3y ago
      That's ok, hopefully this chain is high enough that people will see.
- pydry 3y ago
  People like who? Actual diversity of thought or somebody who worked as an "open source and diversity advocate" at Microsoft - i.e. people who would water down the FSF?
pyrale 3y ago
> All of the inclusivity movements that have happened in my workplace have involved hiring people unfit to do their job. ...As opposed to what happened before, where every single person hired was amazing and never the nephew of some boardmember.
- skulk 3y ago
  This is why I find this discussion so tiresome. Everyone in this thread takes it as an axiom that they have some oracle that takes a candidate as an input and spits out a number representing their suitability for the job which is then fudged for inclusivity. Absolutely zero introspection about how personal and structural biases affect their magic "oracle".
908B64B197 3y ago
> All of the inclusivity movements that have happened in my workplace have involved hiring people unfit to do their job. I'm starting to think there's more harm than good with these inclusivity movements. It creates two categories of students (and grads) when looking at hiring: people you know are there on merit and people who maybe got a little bit of help from "the quota". I've heard it (in engineering only meetings) "you know this guy is solid, he went to X and he's Asian so you know he's there for the right reasons". And the thing is, you can't really argue with that logic. Something I have to wonder is are women and minorities... ok with this?
aaplok 3y ago
> All of the inclusivity movements that have happened in my workplace have involved hiring people unfit to do their job. Honestly it sounds more like a problem with your job's hiring process than with diversity movements. Even if you restrict your pool of candidates to a minority, if that minority is large enough, it's very likely someone from that community is capable of filling the role. If you really don't care about the background then you can ally yourself with someone who does and get someone who both increases diversity and is competent at their job. > The issue around unfettered inclusivity is that it enables grifters to gain positions of power based purely on superficial elements that they possess. That's not specific to diversity. Dick measurement contests have existed forever. It's a myth that the past was more meritocratic that now. The proof is actually that if it were then the high ranks would be a lot more diverse than they are now. At least if you accept the premise that background is not related to capability (ie you are not racist/misogynic).

thumbuddy 3y ago

[flagged]

TeMPOraL 3y ago
I doubt they're anti-diversity, but bringing up this topic in context of RMS and FSF is a bit rich, given the high-profile character assassination attempt directed at RMS, in not so distant past. Free software ecosystem hasn't fully recovered from that yet.
- sneak 3y ago
  The attacks on rms have been wholly based on what he actually said, not character assassination. rms seems to forget that people will read not the words you write, but what they interpret you to be driving at based on the words you write. They took this to mean he was defending pedophilia (when in fact he wrote no such thing, being both neurodivergent and precise). This is rms' fault for being bad at PR whilst being a public figure and leader.
  - bombolo 3y ago
    He said epstin is a serial rapist, but that wasn't really emphasized.
  - TeMPOraL 3y ago
    > The attacks on rms have been wholly based on what he actually said, not character assassination. They weren't. The things he actually said played a minor role in that kerfuffle - it all started with a lot of smears thrown at RMS by a person with some grudge. Additional quotes came later, as people started fishing for them. > rms seems to forget that people will read not the words you write, but what they interpret you to be driving at based on the words you write. They took this to mean he was defending pedophilia (when in fact he wrote no such thing, being both neurodivergent and precise). Why exactly are you defending people being irrational or engaging in power plays? You note yourself what the facts were, so why justify mistaking them? > This is rms' fault for being bad at PR whilst being a public figure and leader. RMS was doing fine until someone decided to destroy him for personal gain. Do you expect every person doing something interesting in a niche community should behave like a Hollywood celebrity or a politician, having their communications managed by teams of spindoctors, on the off chance someone wants to destroy them and picks mass media as their weapon of choice?
    - sneak 3y ago
      > RMS was doing fine until someone decided to destroy him for personal gain. He was not destroyed, literally or figuratively. If that is the basis of your claim, then everything else based upon that has no supporting evidence. Who do you assert yielded personal gain, and how? I saw nothing of the sort.
  - RobotToaster 3y ago
    It's interesting how people will claim to be pro diversity, then say it's someone's fault for communicating in an autistic way.
    - cassianoleal 3y ago
      Diversity, but only the kind I'm comfortable with.
    - sneak 3y ago
      https://xkcd.com/1984/ https://xkcd.com/1984/ He's bad at communicating. It may be because he's autistic, but ultimately that part is not relevant. The way humans in bulk receive public communications is a fact of nature; it would be like someone swimming in the ocean and drowning and saying that it was bad that the ocean couldn't accept their style of swimming. He's a public figure and certain actions undertaken by public figures when communicating with millions of people are bad. He undertook those actions and suffered the negative consequences. It's ultimately not related to his neurodivergence; there are autistic people who don't make huge PR blunders.
- fullspectrumdev 3y ago
  > high-profile character assassination attempt people pointing out that what the man said and did was fucked is somehow a character assassination attempt? Literally none of the factual claims of “RMS said X” have been false, it’s pretty much all been on the record.
  - mandmandam 3y ago
    Vice put out one of the most blatantly false and disgusting smear jobs in recent history [0]. You're defending the indefensible - why? 0 - https://stallmansupport.org/debunking-false-accusations-against-richard-stallman.html https://stallmansupport.org/debunking-false-accusations-agai... (with links to primary sources throughout).
  - TeMPOraL 3y ago
    > Literally none of the factual claims of “RMS said X” have been false, it’s pretty much all been on the record. On the contrary, literally every single claim about what RMS said or did was fabricated, or pulled out of context so badly you could still see the severed threads trailing behind. The original posts and subsequent press articles were one big patchwork of lies and manipulative statements; this was all trivial to verify and apparent to anyone except those who, for some reason, really wanted to believe it's true.
    - Arnt 3y ago
      Literally every single claim. That includes https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26708993 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26708993 then, so go on, tell all about how that was fabricated or pulled out of context.
    - ryandrake 3y ago
      And even if it wasn't fabricated, it's still character assassination. Look, if you take any public figure, and spend enough time looking through all the things they ever written or said in their lives, you can probably find some terrible thing to paint them as a terrible person. Someone could be a role model, have a lifetime of charitable work and positive achievements, bbbbbbut years ago they once said they didn't like gay people (or whatever), all of a sudden none of their achievements matter and they're actually monsters! Any of us with a long posting history on the Internet probably at one time said something that wasn't nice. Cherry picking that one thing and holding it up as the summation of who we are, is character assassination.
- pyrale 3y ago
  > Free software ecosystem hasn't fully recovered from that yet. That's what happens when you put all your eggs into one basket, and then realize that basket had a hole. Maybe free software would be better off if the FSF had spent time building a resilient movement rather than a church to RMS.
faangsticle 3y ago
What kind of nonsense reply is this? What in the previous comment lead you to believe they never experienced diversity? They only commented on the impact of their workplace by incompetent managers, which is a very common experience.
isitmadeofglass 3y ago
> The guy is on video eating skin off his goddam toes while lecturing CS. If that dude or any of his followers are antidiversity, they need to look themself in the mirror. He is a white male who’s in power despite eating toe gunk, while also supporting an environment hostile to woman. He’s in no way a good representation of diversity simply because he’s odd.
davidguetta 3y ago
> Diversity is important For what exactly ? There are countless examples of compagny who innovated or succedded well while everyone being the same race / gender (cf microsoft / apple in the 1990s or literally any china compagny right now). I do enjoy diversity at work because I don't like when all my peers look / think / speak the same, but it's not exactly "important" beside my personal enjoyment
- dralley 3y ago
  And there are countless examples of a company that caused serious damage by not being diverse, see as an example the introduction of seatbelts and airbags that were designed by and tested for men and male-sized dummies, and not women or children.
  - davidguetta 3y ago
    Lets hire children then so they can advise on security issues><. My point is Its a huge unproven assumption that diversity would have magically solved that problem.

c0nfused 3y ago

[flagged]

azangru 3y ago
How (or why) do you read "I don't care what your background is, I care what you bring to the table" as "women and minorities suck at their jobs"? OP doesn't say who sucks at their jobs; he says that whoever they are, be they men, women, minorities, or majorities, he doesn't want them.
caeril 3y ago
There's a bit more nuance to this than "minorities suck at their jobs". Let's say I have two candidates, one is asian and the other is black, and on paper they both look great. They both attended Harvard, and they both interviewed well. Now if I know that the average SAT score required for Asians to be admitted to Harvard is 1580, and the average SAT score required for Blacks to be admitted to Harvard is 1360, and all other metrics (GPA, conscientiousness, work habits, etc) fall along similar lines of differing standards, then I would have a statistical bias toward selecting the Asian candidate. Not because I'm racist, but because DEI and other equity efforts at Harvard have pre-biased the candidate pool for me. In the absence of equity efforts, "I went to Harvard" would be a metric that stands on its own, independent of race. But with DEI, it is not. We have eliminated the "I hate them damn blacks" style of racism and replaced it with a more insidious "In order to make a statistically correct decision, I need to be biased against Blacks" style of racism. I'm not sure this is an improvement. This is an example from college admissions, but the same analogy can be drawn in any environment with strong DEI influence.
- ckemere 3y ago
  Yet somehow in the pre-affirmative action era you never factored in the fact that white legacy applicants have similar (low) SAT requirements?
- bombolo 3y ago
  They "went to" or also graduated there? If they graduated, their high school score doesn't matter.

dtech 3y ago

You seem to trigger on "diversity" and immediately go into a - slightly troubling if you ask me - rant. Diversity means "diverse group of opinion on free software" in this context, not necessarily "diverse group of humans".

isitmadeofglass 3y ago

[dead]

mschuster91 3y ago

> I don't care what your background is, I care what you bring to the table. The problem is that there will always be biases in hiring, "meritocracy" is a myth. It has been shown numerous times (e.g. [1]) that there is a significant bias towards men even if male and female candidates are equal, with the most decisive bias being an assumption that women may not be willing/able to work longer hours. Besides, meritocracy is fraught with other issues as well, see e.g. [2][3][4] for more detailed writeups than I could possibly write here in a HN comment. [1] https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/08912432221137910 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/08912432221137... [2] https://insights.som.yale.edu/insights/how-meritocracy-worsens-inequality-and-makes-even-the-rich-miserable https://insights.som.yale.edu/insights/how-meritocracy-worse... [3] https://press.princeton.edu/ideas/a-belief-in-meritocracy-is-not-only-false-its-bad-for-you https://press.princeton.edu/ideas/a-belief-in-meritocracy-is... [4] https://www.noemamag.com/the-dark-side-of-meritocracy/ https://www.noemamag.com/the-dark-side-of-meritocracy/

blueflow 3y ago
Noema is a US-based think tank (Berggruen) that does a lot of grievance writings. Take it with a truck of salt, they 100% have undisclosed interests.

mc32 3y ago

Also for the FSF you may not want the kind of diversity of thought that would allow commercial interests to seep in slowly. In some cases you really want inflexible dogmatic people with singular focus carrying the torch.

Eumenes 3y ago

Apple fired its head of DEI for saying they should consider diversity of thought, its cult like behavior - https://techcrunch.com/2017/10/13/apple-diversity-head-denise-young-smith-apologizes-for-controversial-choice-of-words-at-summit/ https://techcrunch.com/2017/10/13/apple-diversity-head-denis...

kryogen1c 3y ago

[flagged]

lettergram 3y ago
> A 100% male company isn't going to invent the best tampon I mean… a man did invent tampons https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earle_Haas https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earle_Haas Granted there were previous, less good, versions
- chabes 3y ago
  How is that relevant?
JetSetWilly 3y ago
> If you're concerned about bias in hiring, then eliminate bias. Do blind interviews and redact resumes, broaden your candidate sources. You don't eliminate bias by... introducing bias. The "problem" is that when this purist meritocratic approach has been tried, it results in more white men being hired, not less. Therefore such approaches are swiftly cancelled, in favour of introducing deliberate bias on the basis of superficial characteristics. See here as a good example: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-30/bilnd-recruitment-trial-to-improve-gender-equality-failing-study/8664888 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-30/bilnd-recruitment-tri...
- baremetal 3y ago
  >The "problem" is that when this purist meritocratic approach has been tried, it results in more white men being hired, not less. What an ignorant and bigoted thing to say. Next your gonna say the same thing about Asians. Meritocracy is blind to race and focuses solely on aptitude. The fact you don't like the outcome says more about you than about meritocracy.
  - JetSetWilly 3y ago
    There's a reason I put the word "problem" in scare quotes.

p4bl0 3y ago

You seem to be missing the point. It is about diversity of thought that I'm talking here. The FSF refused people based on them wanting to be able to disagree with RMS, or to continue to work with local free software groups that at some point criticized RMS return to the FSF board based on how it was orchestrated for example.

stavros 3y ago
Yeah, I was going to ask what you meant, you may want to edit your comment to reword it as "dissent" or "diversity of opinion".
- p4bl0 3y ago
  I cannot edit it anymore, sorry :/.
  - stavros 3y ago
    That's ok, hopefully this chain is high enough that people will see.
pydry 3y ago
People like who? Actual diversity of thought or somebody who worked as an "open source and diversity advocate" at Microsoft - i.e. people who would water down the FSF?

pyrale 3y ago

> All of the inclusivity movements that have happened in my workplace have involved hiring people unfit to do their job. ...As opposed to what happened before, where every single person hired was amazing and never the nephew of some boardmember.

skulk 3y ago
This is why I find this discussion so tiresome. Everyone in this thread takes it as an axiom that they have some oracle that takes a candidate as an input and spits out a number representing their suitability for the job which is then fudged for inclusivity. Absolutely zero introspection about how personal and structural biases affect their magic "oracle".

908B64B197 3y ago

> All of the inclusivity movements that have happened in my workplace have involved hiring people unfit to do their job. I'm starting to think there's more harm than good with these inclusivity movements. It creates two categories of students (and grads) when looking at hiring: people you know are there on merit and people who maybe got a little bit of help from "the quota". I've heard it (in engineering only meetings) "you know this guy is solid, he went to X and he's Asian so you know he's there for the right reasons". And the thing is, you can't really argue with that logic. Something I have to wonder is are women and minorities... ok with this?

aaplok 3y ago

> All of the inclusivity movements that have happened in my workplace have involved hiring people unfit to do their job. Honestly it sounds more like a problem with your job's hiring process than with diversity movements. Even if you restrict your pool of candidates to a minority, if that minority is large enough, it's very likely someone from that community is capable of filling the role. If you really don't care about the background then you can ally yourself with someone who does and get someone who both increases diversity and is competent at their job. > The issue around unfettered inclusivity is that it enables grifters to gain positions of power based purely on superficial elements that they possess. That's not specific to diversity. Dick measurement contests have existed forever. It's a myth that the past was more meritocratic that now. The proof is actually that if it were then the high ranks would be a lot more diverse than they are now. At least if you accept the premise that background is not related to capability (ie you are not racist/misogynic).