3 ms·

I don’t even disagree with you about class, but to deal with that we need to deal with capitalism itself, which I’ve given up on at this point. So if this is t

by amrocha 9mo ago

I don’t even disagree with you about class, but to deal with that we need to deal with capitalism itself, which I’ve given up on at this point. So if this is the system we’re stuck with, and it’s an unfair system, then let’s at least make sure it’s equitably unfair. The goal is not to make sure the most qualified person gets the job. I actually think evaluating others fairly is impossible so that’s an impossible goal. Sorry if you feel that you got the short end of the stick. I got it too. Someone has to.

dijit 9mo ago
Sounds like giving up. You’re arguing we should take turns being discriminated against because fixing the system is too hard. I’d rather actually try to reduce the total amount of discrimination instead of just spinning the wheel to see whose turn it is to lose. “Someone has to get the short end” isn’t wisdom: it’s defeatism, and toxic at that.
- amrocha 9mo ago
  The issue is not “discrimination is happening”. The issue is that systematic discrimination has biased outcomes and under represented certain demographics, and that needs to be addressed. Discrimination against individuals is not a problem.
  - dijit 9mo ago
    “Discrimination against individuals is not a problem” is quite possibly the most dystopian sentence I’ve read on HN. I’m one of those individuals. So are the women and minorities you claim to be helping. We’re not statistical abstractions to be shuffled around in service of demographic targets. If your solution to systematic discrimination requires you to declare that discriminating against individuals doesn’t matter, you’ve lost the plot entirely.
    - amrocha 9mo ago
      I can say the same thing at you. If your solution to large demographics experiencing systematic discrimination over decades leading to worse outcomes is to tell them that from now on it’ll be different but that all the disadvantages they experienced will not be dealt with then you’re either insane, or trying to disguise your bias.
      - dijit 9mo ago
        You literally just said discrimination against individuals isn't a problem. I'm objecting to that specifically. I've proposed structural solutions throughout this thread. You've proposed accepting discrimination and deciding whose turn it is to experience it. These are not morally equivalent positions.
        amrocha 9mo ago
        No you haven’t. You’ve offered platitudes. “I think about it all the time” ok, what are you actually going to do about it? The grow the pie approaches you mentioned only works while the pie is growing, and we’ve had layoffs for the past 2 years. What is your solution now that the pie isn’t getting bigger? It sure sounds like your solution is telling people to wait 150 years and hope the problem solves itself.
        dijit 9mo ago
        When growth stops, you focus on evaluation bias and institutional barriers. Blind resume screening, structured interviews with standardised criteria, expanding recruiting beyond homogeneous networks, addressing sponsorship patterns in promotions. None of these require growth. None require discriminating against anyone. But here's the thing: I'm not the one who needs to justify my position. You're asking me, someone who's been explicitly discriminated against multiple times, to solve systemic inequality for you, whilst simultaneously defending discrimination against individuals as acceptable policy. I've spent two decades becoming exceptionally good at what I do. I ensure fairness in my own decisions. I can't fix capitalism or rewrite history, and it's absurd to demand I present a complete solution to systemic inequality before I'm allowed to object to being told I'm the wrong demographic for jobs I've earned. Your position is that discrimination is fine as long as it's against the right people. Mine is that discrimination is wrong. One of us is being a hypocrite here, and it's not me.

by amrocha 9mo ago

dijit 9mo ago

Sounds like giving up. You’re arguing we should take turns being discriminated against because fixing the system is too hard. I’d rather actually try to reduce the total amount of discrimination instead of just spinning the wheel to see whose turn it is to lose. “Someone has to get the short end” isn’t wisdom: it’s defeatism, and toxic at that.

amrocha 9mo ago
The issue is not “discrimination is happening”. The issue is that systematic discrimination has biased outcomes and under represented certain demographics, and that needs to be addressed. Discrimination against individuals is not a problem.
- dijit 9mo ago
  “Discrimination against individuals is not a problem” is quite possibly the most dystopian sentence I’ve read on HN. I’m one of those individuals. So are the women and minorities you claim to be helping. We’re not statistical abstractions to be shuffled around in service of demographic targets. If your solution to systematic discrimination requires you to declare that discriminating against individuals doesn’t matter, you’ve lost the plot entirely.
  - amrocha 9mo ago
    I can say the same thing at you. If your solution to large demographics experiencing systematic discrimination over decades leading to worse outcomes is to tell them that from now on it’ll be different but that all the disadvantages they experienced will not be dealt with then you’re either insane, or trying to disguise your bias.
    - dijit 9mo ago
      You literally just said discrimination against individuals isn't a problem. I'm objecting to that specifically. I've proposed structural solutions throughout this thread. You've proposed accepting discrimination and deciding whose turn it is to experience it. These are not morally equivalent positions.
      - amrocha 9mo ago
        No you haven’t. You’ve offered platitudes. “I think about it all the time” ok, what are you actually going to do about it? The grow the pie approaches you mentioned only works while the pie is growing, and we’ve had layoffs for the past 2 years. What is your solution now that the pie isn’t getting bigger? It sure sounds like your solution is telling people to wait 150 years and hope the problem solves itself.
        dijit 9mo ago
        When growth stops, you focus on evaluation bias and institutional barriers. Blind resume screening, structured interviews with standardised criteria, expanding recruiting beyond homogeneous networks, addressing sponsorship patterns in promotions. None of these require growth. None require discriminating against anyone. But here's the thing: I'm not the one who needs to justify my position. You're asking me, someone who's been explicitly discriminated against multiple times, to solve systemic inequality for you, whilst simultaneously defending discrimination against individuals as acceptable policy. I've spent two decades becoming exceptionally good at what I do. I ensure fairness in my own decisions. I can't fix capitalism or rewrite history, and it's absurd to demand I present a complete solution to systemic inequality before I'm allowed to object to being told I'm the wrong demographic for jobs I've earned. Your position is that discrimination is fine as long as it's against the right people. Mine is that discrimination is wrong. One of us is being a hypocrite here, and it's not me.