5 ms·

IMHO, it may be a contradiction - there is no need for any specific program to encourage some specific group (even if one is a member of a given group, and coul

by guylhem 14y ago

IMHO, it may be a contradiction - there is no need for any specific program to encourage some specific group (even if one is a member of a given group, and could take advantage of the program for profit in the short run, because one don't get better in the long run by having it easier it the short run) I can't say anything about paypal - I wasn't there, and I don't like to pass judgements. But if they indeed were that dumb not to hire a good candidate only for the sports he plays, it's no wonder their product sucks more an more. Personally, I'm eagerly waiting for a competitor until bitcoin gets more momentum. BTW one thing I'd like to say - the opportunity in coding is there for everyone - it's even more open than the NBA because the judge is the market, and with the current technology everyone can easily start a tech company and compete globally. It's a pure and perfect competition. There's no need to be hired be a company - you create your company and show your product to the market. If it works, if it does what people need, you will get money.

Anechoic 14y ago
it's even more open than the NBA because the judge is the market Interesting, I have the exact opposite viewpoint - I can see the result of a software project, but I have very little insight into the contributions behind the scenes. In sports, I (and the rest of the world) can see the contributions of the atheltes and judge merit for ourselves. For example, I know the new iOS maps have problems, but (aside from press leaks) I don't have a lot of insight into who did what. On the other hand, I know from watching Knicks games last season that Jeremy Lin was the real deal. I know the result of the 2012 Super Bowl (Giants beat Patriots) and I also saw the contribution of the team members (for example, Tom Brady throwing a perfect pass to Wes Welker at he end of the game that Welker dropped). I've always see athletics as the closest ideal to a meritocracy that we have in our society.
- guylhem 14y ago
  We do have opposite viewpoints because I see the one man company or consultant as the closest ideal to a meritocracy. But still +1'ing for this very interesting opinion - because you're right, in a company which more than 1 employee it's hard to judge the individual performance.
protomyth 14y ago
I have to disagree with you there. Plenty of examples of poor kids getting into the NBA these days, but coding requires your parents to have enough cash to buy you a proper PC with development tools or a Mac. There are HS BB coaches, but very few programming mentors in the poor or rural areas. Heck, teaching programming went the way of vocational programs. It was once different, but that door closed hard.
- guylhem 14y ago
  Poor kids get into the NBA because they invest a lot into their physical training and game abilities. You know the 10'000 hours rule. A ball may be less expansive than a computer, but a free access to a public library and following online programming courses is even less expansive. IMHO, the only real difference is peer acceptance of an investment in sport, which still ranks much higher (socially) than investing time in computers and learning.
  - protomyth 14y ago
    Your assumption that there is a public library available to kids to learn to program on is sadly not true for a lot of rural children. For the majority of my youth, a public library either required a parent's time investment or was not available at all. The situation hasn't changed. Online programming training and tools are also not exactly top notch, and I would not be surprised if the tip off some "dangerous" activity with the librarians. When we lost the class of computers that the C64, Vic 20, Atari 400/800, TI99/4A, and Sinclairs made up, we lost a lot of the onramp to programming.
flyinRyan 14y ago
I'm afraid you're glasses are a bit too rosy. It's true that while you're still at home you could start your own company. But some people don't get that inspiration until a bit later in life. Once you have a wife and kids, you cannot make a business unless you get funding. So if people who give funding are racist (I have no idea if they are) then minorities have less chance. So at the very beginning anyone has a chance. But once you have some responsibilities white males still have a lot of opportunity to make their own business and other groups may not.

by guylhem 14y ago

Anechoic 14y ago

it's even more open than the NBA because the judge is the market Interesting, I have the exact opposite viewpoint - I can see the result of a software project, but I have very little insight into the contributions behind the scenes. In sports, I (and the rest of the world) can see the contributions of the atheltes and judge merit for ourselves. For example, I know the new iOS maps have problems, but (aside from press leaks) I don't have a lot of insight into who did what. On the other hand, I know from watching Knicks games last season that Jeremy Lin was the real deal. I know the result of the 2012 Super Bowl (Giants beat Patriots) and I also saw the contribution of the team members (for example, Tom Brady throwing a perfect pass to Wes Welker at he end of the game that Welker dropped). I've always see athletics as the closest ideal to a meritocracy that we have in our society.

guylhem 14y ago
We do have opposite viewpoints because I see the one man company or consultant as the closest ideal to a meritocracy. But still +1'ing for this very interesting opinion - because you're right, in a company which more than 1 employee it's hard to judge the individual performance.

protomyth 14y ago

I have to disagree with you there. Plenty of examples of poor kids getting into the NBA these days, but coding requires your parents to have enough cash to buy you a proper PC with development tools or a Mac. There are HS BB coaches, but very few programming mentors in the poor or rural areas. Heck, teaching programming went the way of vocational programs. It was once different, but that door closed hard.

guylhem 14y ago
Poor kids get into the NBA because they invest a lot into their physical training and game abilities. You know the 10'000 hours rule. A ball may be less expansive than a computer, but a free access to a public library and following online programming courses is even less expansive. IMHO, the only real difference is peer acceptance of an investment in sport, which still ranks much higher (socially) than investing time in computers and learning.
- protomyth 14y ago
  Your assumption that there is a public library available to kids to learn to program on is sadly not true for a lot of rural children. For the majority of my youth, a public library either required a parent's time investment or was not available at all. The situation hasn't changed. Online programming training and tools are also not exactly top notch, and I would not be surprised if the tip off some "dangerous" activity with the librarians. When we lost the class of computers that the C64, Vic 20, Atari 400/800, TI99/4A, and Sinclairs made up, we lost a lot of the onramp to programming.

flyinRyan 14y ago

I'm afraid you're glasses are a bit too rosy. It's true that while you're still at home you could start your own company. But some people don't get that inspiration until a bit later in life. Once you have a wife and kids, you cannot make a business unless you get funding. So if people who give funding are racist (I have no idea if they are) then minorities have less chance. So at the very beginning anyone has a chance. But once you have some responsibilities white males still have a lot of opportunity to make their own business and other groups may not.