5 ms·

... trust most people saw the logical flaw - the author is assuming that the ability to program is currently evenly distributed. I don't see anything from the

... trust most people saw the logical flaw - the author is assuming that the ability to program is currently evenly distributed. I don't see anything from the author which can be construed as the statement, "ability, is at present, evenly distributed." If you withdraw that stipulation, what you have is: 4. Ergo, opportunities to become a computer programmer [e.g. education] are not distributed according to merit [e.g. by identifying and cultivating potential in individuals.] Which is entirely defensible as a conclusion.

Lazare 14y ago
The "at present" stipulation doesn't really change anything. The author is claiming that the ability to program is evenly distributed, but the plain truth of the matter is that more white English-speaking males in their 20s can program than can <fill in demographic here>. Which is because of, yes, racism, sexism, inequality, and a host of other societal ills, but it dosn't change the fact that Joe's House of Discount Programming in Des Moines Iowa gets a lot of resumes from people that look like us here on HN, and very few resumes from middle-aged black women who speak Swahili. The HR department at Joe's House of Discount Programming may well be biased, but you can't conclude that from the evidence presented. More broadly, you cannot tar the programming profession as racist and sexist because we don't hire people who don't actually exist (even if, yes, the reason those people don't exist is because of racism and sexism and all the rest).
- jessedhillon 14y ago
  Um, you don't think that calling the given situation meritorious would be racist/sexist? 1. Construct a system to deliver engineering educations. For whatever reason, white males are overrepresented in this system. 2. Place those engineers at top engineering firms and startups, where they succeed. 3. Conclude that the system rewards effort and ability fairly, and therefore the current beneficiaries are the best and most deserving. Step #3 is ignorant and stupid. To cast this another way, this would be like going back to a pre-Jackie Robinson period of baseball history, or the pre-integration period in basketball history, and concluding that the best baseball players in the world are white. Yes, in a very literal sense that is true, if you define basketball players as only those people who can right now play basketball professionally, in a system which is accessible only to a small subset of the population. Even if there were people playing amateur or street ball, who had great raw potential, without being able to enter programs where they could hone and refine their skill they would be inferior in many ways to the pros. And a person who would hew to that literal rendering would be considered myopic, shallow and intellectually dishonest. Similarly, to say that the current crop of engineering talent represents the most deserving talent in the world is a backhand to all the people who are excluded from participating in the system to begin with. So yes, you can't say "programming is a racist institution because it doesn't hire people who don't exist." You can, however, say that programming is a racist institution because it benefits from a lopsided system of selection, and then arrogantly declares that the selection system is fair, that those selected received no undue benefit in their selection, and therefore those selected are the best.

Lazare 14y ago

The "at present" stipulation doesn't really change anything. The author is claiming that the ability to program is evenly distributed, but the plain truth of the matter is that more white English-speaking males in their 20s can program than can <fill in demographic here>. Which is because of, yes, racism, sexism, inequality, and a host of other societal ills, but it dosn't change the fact that Joe's House of Discount Programming in Des Moines Iowa gets a lot of resumes from people that look like us here on HN, and very few resumes from middle-aged black women who speak Swahili. The HR department at Joe's House of Discount Programming may well be biased, but you can't conclude that from the evidence presented. More broadly, you cannot tar the programming profession as racist and sexist because we don't hire people who don't actually exist (even if, yes, the reason those people don't exist is because of racism and sexism and all the rest).

jessedhillon 14y ago
Um, you don't think that calling the given situation meritorious would be racist/sexist? 1. Construct a system to deliver engineering educations. For whatever reason, white males are overrepresented in this system. 2. Place those engineers at top engineering firms and startups, where they succeed. 3. Conclude that the system rewards effort and ability fairly, and therefore the current beneficiaries are the best and most deserving. Step #3 is ignorant and stupid. To cast this another way, this would be like going back to a pre-Jackie Robinson period of baseball history, or the pre-integration period in basketball history, and concluding that the best baseball players in the world are white. Yes, in a very literal sense that is true, if you define basketball players as only those people who can right now play basketball professionally, in a system which is accessible only to a small subset of the population. Even if there were people playing amateur or street ball, who had great raw potential, without being able to enter programs where they could hone and refine their skill they would be inferior in many ways to the pros. And a person who would hew to that literal rendering would be considered myopic, shallow and intellectually dishonest. Similarly, to say that the current crop of engineering talent represents the most deserving talent in the world is a backhand to all the people who are excluded from participating in the system to begin with. So yes, you can't say "programming is a racist institution because it doesn't hire people who don't exist." You can, however, say that programming is a racist institution because it benefits from a lopsided system of selection, and then arrogantly declares that the selection system is fair, that those selected received no undue benefit in their selection, and therefore those selected are the best.