6 ms·

I'd like to see a proper journalistic investigation into every other EDR sensor on Linux as well. I really hate it when supposed journalists look for an angle a

I'd like to see a proper journalistic investigation into every other EDR sensor on Linux as well. I really hate it when supposed journalists look for an angle and pursue it without critical thinking. But they could be right, they may have an issue in their engineering department recently. --- Speaking of,I wanted to mention a slightly related observation I've had recently scrolling through twitter (unfortunately) looking for information on this crisis. There are a lot of people who at least know enough technical jargon to probably work in IT or technology but they're using arguments like "it must be because of a DEI hire", for those who are unaware they're using "DEI" as a replacement for a hard-r N-word. In other words, I just learned that blatant racists are not a rarity in our corner of the world. If you're not one of them, I wanted to inform you of what they really mean. Fortunately I haven't seen this on HN so far :)

bdjsiqoocwk 2y ago
> it must be because of a DEI hire Of course, white people making mistakes is unheard of. Yeah it's quite frustrating how easily people latch on to the daily meme if it reinforces their preexisting prejudices. Republicans calling Kamala Harris the DEI candidate in 3, 2, 1...
- wdlou 2y ago
  [flagged]
- notepad0x90 2y ago
  For the record, crowdstrike isn't the type of company that does DEI hiring. For technical roles, they let technical people from the team you're interviewing for grill you and it is their opinion that decides the outcome of first round interviews.
  - rsynnott 2y ago
    I'm not sure what people think inclusive hiring _is_. In almost all cases, it's pretty much entirely about the _pipeline_, trying to attract a more diverse set of people to interview in the first place. There's generally nothing special about the interviews.
    - bdjsiqoocwk 2y ago
      > I'm not sure what people think inclusive hiring _is_ I bet you a lot of people think DEI is companies go "you're black, you're hired". Instead you're absolutely right, it's manipulating the pipeline so that 50% are the overall best and 50% are diverse. The "diverse" ones also have to do great in their interviews, no one is automatically hired.
      - rsynnott 2y ago
        > it's manipulating the pipeline so that 50% are the overall best and 50% are diverse Not even that; it’s changing the pipeline so that it has a lower weighting on upper-middle-class white men who went to one of about four universities (which does not actually equate with ‘overall best’). One surprisingly simple thing that companies can do is be realistic about their requirements in the job spec. There’s a fair bit of evidence that if you have an aspirational job spec, then some candidates will go “well, I meet some of that” and apply, and others will go “well, I only have five years of experience in [whatever], not six like it says in the job spec” and won’t apply. And group 2 tends to be less male, less white, and more working-class.
- wongogue 2y ago
  For your last point, there already is a long thread in the Biden post yesterday. As per them, it makes both the sides same somehow.
Rinzler89 2y ago
>I just learned that blatant racists are not a rarity in our corner of the world. That's what you get if you browse Twitter. Stay off mainstream Twitter for your own sanity. > Fortunately I haven't seen this on HN so far :) Here people just blame offshore workers for this bug or other such critical bugs, as if US workers don't make mistakes. Peoples' egos are just unbelievable. If it's not DEI developers, then it must be those filthy foreign programmers from developing nations responsible for poor quality software and I've even seen here mentioned that Windows worldwide dominance also be blamed on SW devs from developing nations for being too poor to own Macs. I despise this "holier than thou" mentality of some privileged tech workers.
- shiroiushi 2y ago
  >Windows worldwide dominance also be blamed on SW devs from developing nations for being too poor to own Macs. Linux has been a viable alternative for decades now for many tasks. This problem wasn't caused by a lack of money. If you want to blame someone for the dominance of Windows, blame corporations and managers, because they're the ones that have chosen it. SW devs from developing nations have only been doing what they perceived to be in their best economic interest.
  - Rinzler89 2y ago
    >Linux has been a viable alternative for decades now for many tasks. For decades?! Maybe on the servers, but on PCs, hardly. Also, even if that may be the case now, it doesn't change the fact that at your job they'll most likely use Windows not Linux on the workstations. Linux is king on the servers, but PCs everywhere will mostly still be Windows, especially in corporate environments.
    - shiroiushi 2y ago
      >For decades?! Maybe on the servers, but on PCs, hardly. While it wasn't as easy as it is today, I've been running Linux on my home desktop since around 1999. It's never been that hard, and it did require more careful hardware selection (no, you can't just grab some random dirt-cheap piece-of-shit "winprinter" and expect it to work with Linux), but it's always been quite doable for anyone who claims to be skilled with computers. We're talking about IT workers here, not grandma. >at your job they'll most likely use Windows not Linux on the workstations This is exactly my point in my prior post.
formerly_proven 2y ago
That stuff is absolutely on HN.
- notepad0x90 2y ago
  Well, I just don't spend enough time on HN then :) I'm curious about what you mean though, if you have any sample threads.
rsynnott 2y ago
> There are a lot of people who at least know enough technical jargon to probably work in IT or technology but they're using arguments like "it must be because of a DEI hire" There is a certain type of tech person (well, they probably exist elsewhere, but the tech variety is particularly noisy) who seems absolutely determined to use this one every time a company does something stupid; there seems to be an odd unwillingness to blame _process_, rather than some sort of imagined individual saboteur (who would, preferably, in the minds of these people, be someone other than a straight white man). A particularly extreme example, to the point that it almost read as parody; when the door plug blew out of that 737, there was a certain amount of fixation by the weirdos on Twitter on how the pilot was a woman. Quite how this was supposed to have anything to do with it was unclear. The whole thing is pretty weird, and feels quite new. Sometimes, a poorly-run company is just a poorly-run company.
- notepad0x90 2y ago
  You're right, I'm actually surprised my post is getting negative downvotes, it was only informative in my opinion. But perhaps the people I'm talking about are also on HN they're just silent on this topic due to efficient moderation. Imagine actually being a minority, woman or any group like that and making a mistake. sucks.
  - thworp 2y ago
    > it was only informative in my opinion Was it though? Your second paragraph is written in a way that it can easily be interpreted as "all critics of DEI hiring are racists". Is that a more sophisticated statement than "all minorities are incompetent"? Is being a racist the only reason someone might be opposed to quota-based hiring?
    - notepad0x90 2y ago
      yes, it was. I was informing you that all critics of DEI outside of an actual discussion thread about DEI are racists and "DEI" in that context is equivalent to the n-word. I hope that clarifies my intent better. To clarify, I'm not to keen on DEI either, but we're not really talking about DEI here are we now?
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
protocolture 2y ago
Its honestly hard to hire women anyway. In my experience it doesnt matter if you find an extremely talented person the prejudices of the HR team often lead to them being pulled from the shortlist.
EnigmaFlare 2y ago
Don't be so quick to assume racism. You don't see people blaming Microsoft's cock-ups on Indians who are not DEI hires but would be a valid target for racists. I think blaming DEI hires for problems is mostly people who don't like the idea of hiring based on race/gender/etc. and who also realize that if you do that hard enough, you're bound to get inferior people because you're limiting your hiring pool. Of course companies that pay low salaries are also limiting their hiring pool and also bound to get inferior people. There are plenty of complaints about that too - if a famously low-paying big consultancy company (IBM?) has a cock-up, it's often blamed on their low pay.
- regularfry 2y ago
  > I think blaming DEI hires for problems is mostly people who don't like the idea of hiring based on race/gender/etc. and who also realize that if you do that hard enough, you're bound to get inferior people because you're limiting your hiring pool. Wherever I've seen diversity initiatives, the point is to expand the hiring pool, not shrink it. In other words this is people who, for whatever reason, want to portray the situation as precisely the opposite of what it is.
- plesner 2y ago
  > I think blaming DEI hires for problems is mostly people who don't like the idea of hiring based on race/gender/etc. and who also realize that if you do that hard enough, you're bound to get inferior people because you're limiting your hiring pool. Isn't that exactly the problem though: hiring is currently based on race/gender in favor of white/male hard enough that you get interior people from that hiring pool?
  - notepad0x90 2y ago
    no, not in tech companies and certainly not at crowdstrike. lookup people who work there and you'll see. In cybersecurity, the talent pool is so small you can't even pick and choose like that even if you wanted to.
- SoftTalker 2y ago
  "Must be a DEI hire" is also a zero-effort meme response that will reliably get upvoted by at least some subset of followers/readers. A lot of the time it's no more than that.
jordanb 2y ago
> Speaking of,I wanted to mention a slightly related observation I've had recently scrolling through twitter (unfortunately) looking for information on this crisis. There are a lot of people who at least know enough technical jargon to probably work in IT or technology but they're using arguments like "it must be because of a DEI hire", Very easily could be one highly technical or just highly resourced individual with a bot farm..

bdjsiqoocwk 2y ago

> it must be because of a DEI hire Of course, white people making mistakes is unheard of. Yeah it's quite frustrating how easily people latch on to the daily meme if it reinforces their preexisting prejudices. Republicans calling Kamala Harris the DEI candidate in 3, 2, 1...

wdlou 2y ago
[flagged]
notepad0x90 2y ago
For the record, crowdstrike isn't the type of company that does DEI hiring. For technical roles, they let technical people from the team you're interviewing for grill you and it is their opinion that decides the outcome of first round interviews.
- rsynnott 2y ago
  I'm not sure what people think inclusive hiring _is_. In almost all cases, it's pretty much entirely about the _pipeline_, trying to attract a more diverse set of people to interview in the first place. There's generally nothing special about the interviews.
  - bdjsiqoocwk 2y ago
    > I'm not sure what people think inclusive hiring _is_ I bet you a lot of people think DEI is companies go "you're black, you're hired". Instead you're absolutely right, it's manipulating the pipeline so that 50% are the overall best and 50% are diverse. The "diverse" ones also have to do great in their interviews, no one is automatically hired.
    - rsynnott 2y ago
      > it's manipulating the pipeline so that 50% are the overall best and 50% are diverse Not even that; it’s changing the pipeline so that it has a lower weighting on upper-middle-class white men who went to one of about four universities (which does not actually equate with ‘overall best’). One surprisingly simple thing that companies can do is be realistic about their requirements in the job spec. There’s a fair bit of evidence that if you have an aspirational job spec, then some candidates will go “well, I meet some of that” and apply, and others will go “well, I only have five years of experience in [whatever], not six like it says in the job spec” and won’t apply. And group 2 tends to be less male, less white, and more working-class.
wongogue 2y ago
For your last point, there already is a long thread in the Biden post yesterday. As per them, it makes both the sides same somehow.

Rinzler89 2y ago

>I just learned that blatant racists are not a rarity in our corner of the world. That's what you get if you browse Twitter. Stay off mainstream Twitter for your own sanity. > Fortunately I haven't seen this on HN so far :) Here people just blame offshore workers for this bug or other such critical bugs, as if US workers don't make mistakes. Peoples' egos are just unbelievable. If it's not DEI developers, then it must be those filthy foreign programmers from developing nations responsible for poor quality software and I've even seen here mentioned that Windows worldwide dominance also be blamed on SW devs from developing nations for being too poor to own Macs. I despise this "holier than thou" mentality of some privileged tech workers.

shiroiushi 2y ago
>Windows worldwide dominance also be blamed on SW devs from developing nations for being too poor to own Macs. Linux has been a viable alternative for decades now for many tasks. This problem wasn't caused by a lack of money. If you want to blame someone for the dominance of Windows, blame corporations and managers, because they're the ones that have chosen it. SW devs from developing nations have only been doing what they perceived to be in their best economic interest.
- Rinzler89 2y ago
  >Linux has been a viable alternative for decades now for many tasks. For decades?! Maybe on the servers, but on PCs, hardly. Also, even if that may be the case now, it doesn't change the fact that at your job they'll most likely use Windows not Linux on the workstations. Linux is king on the servers, but PCs everywhere will mostly still be Windows, especially in corporate environments.
  - shiroiushi 2y ago
    >For decades?! Maybe on the servers, but on PCs, hardly. While it wasn't as easy as it is today, I've been running Linux on my home desktop since around 1999. It's never been that hard, and it did require more careful hardware selection (no, you can't just grab some random dirt-cheap piece-of-shit "winprinter" and expect it to work with Linux), but it's always been quite doable for anyone who claims to be skilled with computers. We're talking about IT workers here, not grandma. >at your job they'll most likely use Windows not Linux on the workstations This is exactly my point in my prior post.

formerly_proven 2y ago

That stuff is absolutely on HN.

notepad0x90 2y ago
Well, I just don't spend enough time on HN then :) I'm curious about what you mean though, if you have any sample threads.

rsynnott 2y ago

> There are a lot of people who at least know enough technical jargon to probably work in IT or technology but they're using arguments like "it must be because of a DEI hire" There is a certain type of tech person (well, they probably exist elsewhere, but the tech variety is particularly noisy) who seems absolutely determined to use this one every time a company does something stupid; there seems to be an odd unwillingness to blame _process_, rather than some sort of imagined individual saboteur (who would, preferably, in the minds of these people, be someone other than a straight white man). A particularly extreme example, to the point that it almost read as parody; when the door plug blew out of that 737, there was a certain amount of fixation by the weirdos on Twitter on how the pilot was a woman. Quite how this was supposed to have anything to do with it was unclear. The whole thing is pretty weird, and feels quite new. Sometimes, a poorly-run company is just a poorly-run company.

notepad0x90 2y ago
You're right, I'm actually surprised my post is getting negative downvotes, it was only informative in my opinion. But perhaps the people I'm talking about are also on HN they're just silent on this topic due to efficient moderation. Imagine actually being a minority, woman or any group like that and making a mistake. sucks.
- thworp 2y ago
  > it was only informative in my opinion Was it though? Your second paragraph is written in a way that it can easily be interpreted as "all critics of DEI hiring are racists". Is that a more sophisticated statement than "all minorities are incompetent"? Is being a racist the only reason someone might be opposed to quota-based hiring?
  - notepad0x90 2y ago
    yes, it was. I was informing you that all critics of DEI outside of an actual discussion thread about DEI are racists and "DEI" in that context is equivalent to the n-word. I hope that clarifies my intent better. To clarify, I'm not to keen on DEI either, but we're not really talking about DEI here are we now?

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

protocolture 2y ago

Its honestly hard to hire women anyway. In my experience it doesnt matter if you find an extremely talented person the prejudices of the HR team often lead to them being pulled from the shortlist.

EnigmaFlare 2y ago

Don't be so quick to assume racism. You don't see people blaming Microsoft's cock-ups on Indians who are not DEI hires but would be a valid target for racists. I think blaming DEI hires for problems is mostly people who don't like the idea of hiring based on race/gender/etc. and who also realize that if you do that hard enough, you're bound to get inferior people because you're limiting your hiring pool. Of course companies that pay low salaries are also limiting their hiring pool and also bound to get inferior people. There are plenty of complaints about that too - if a famously low-paying big consultancy company (IBM?) has a cock-up, it's often blamed on their low pay.

regularfry 2y ago
> I think blaming DEI hires for problems is mostly people who don't like the idea of hiring based on race/gender/etc. and who also realize that if you do that hard enough, you're bound to get inferior people because you're limiting your hiring pool. Wherever I've seen diversity initiatives, the point is to expand the hiring pool, not shrink it. In other words this is people who, for whatever reason, want to portray the situation as precisely the opposite of what it is.
plesner 2y ago
> I think blaming DEI hires for problems is mostly people who don't like the idea of hiring based on race/gender/etc. and who also realize that if you do that hard enough, you're bound to get inferior people because you're limiting your hiring pool. Isn't that exactly the problem though: hiring is currently based on race/gender in favor of white/male hard enough that you get interior people from that hiring pool?
- notepad0x90 2y ago
  no, not in tech companies and certainly not at crowdstrike. lookup people who work there and you'll see. In cybersecurity, the talent pool is so small you can't even pick and choose like that even if you wanted to.
SoftTalker 2y ago
"Must be a DEI hire" is also a zero-effort meme response that will reliably get upvoted by at least some subset of followers/readers. A lot of the time it's no more than that.

jordanb 2y ago

> Speaking of,I wanted to mention a slightly related observation I've had recently scrolling through twitter (unfortunately) looking for information on this crisis. There are a lot of people who at least know enough technical jargon to probably work in IT or technology but they're using arguments like "it must be because of a DEI hire", Very easily could be one highly technical or just highly resourced individual with a bot farm..