15 ms·

Diversity and Startups

160 points by dmnd 12y ago

minimaxir 12y ago
> Specifically, we’d like the community to help by downvoting comments that make HN an unwelcoming place to anyone. That's only a solution for half of the problem on Hacker News. The other half is that most submissions about gender/diversity get flagged to death very consistently, which make it difficult to have any meaningful discussion about these topics.
- Permit 12y ago
  We have no way to tell if they're being flagged by users or setting off the automated system for detecting flamewars. One of the problems with the topic is that essentially every Hacker News reader feels as though they're qualified to comment on the topic. This translates into massive nested threads that blow up with people arguing the same points. I'm not convinced that discussion of these issues on Hacker News does anything to push the ball forward. I have yet to meet the person who changed their position on the subject due to an internet argument.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
  - minimaxir 12y ago
    About a year ago, a friend wrote a good post about diversity in hackathons which was submitted to HN and hit #2 quickly, then dropped down to the second page in an instant: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6495950 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6495950 Not many people commented on it. I believe the flame-war detector only takes significant effect when # comments > # points, which is a pretty good heuristic for a flame war that has gone out of control.
    - Permit 12y ago
      Haha it's funny that you've cited that post as I'm complaining that it's getting flagged in the comments... I guess the point is that HN is a black box to us regular users and it's tough to speculate on how and why threads move as they do.
    - dang 12y ago
      For what it's worth at this late date, that post set off the voting ring detector. No users flagged it and no moderator moderated it.
      - minimaxir 12y ago
        That clarifies that mystery :P. Thanks!
      - nbm 12y ago
        Any chance of getting some transparency of what automated or manual processes have affected a particular story (ie, on the story comment page itself), possibly delayed by some period to prevent bad actors from realising their voting rings or whatever were discovered?
  - king_jester 12y ago
    > We have no way to tell if they're being flagged by users or setting off the automated system for detecting flamewars. This is the fundamental problem. No matter how a story gets made invisible, once it gets in that state nobody knows how it got there and whether or not it was justified. Not to mention that no matter how those stories vanish, HN (by community or systems) is not facilitating discussion on diversity, sexism, racism, etc. in tech.
- tomjen3 12y ago
  I have never seen an interesting discussion on that subject where I came away being smarter or having learned something new. On the other hand I have had such discussions suck many hours away. I understand that this is a topic very dear to many peoples hearts, but it seems like one of those things that are just not a good fit for HN.
- dang 12y ago
  > The other half is that most submissions about gender/diversity get flagged to death very consistently, which make it difficult to have any meaningful discussion about these topics. It isn't user flagging that makes meaningful discussion difficult. It's the discussers, unfortunately, who are doing that. I wonder if you may have cause and effect reversed here. Also, it isn't true that most of these submissions get flagged to death. Some do, but most don't, so in most cases the discussions continue. Moderators also sometimes unkill stories that were flag-killed, precisely so discussions can continue. (An example from last night is https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8083596 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8083596).
  - zorpner 12y ago
    Do people who routinely flag stories about diversity in tech have their flagging privileges revoked?
    - dang 12y ago
      We don't really revoke flagging privileges much anymore; mostly just for obvious abuse. Are you wondering whether revoking selected users' flagging privileges would change the balance on these stories? I doubt it would. We're talking about a larger-scale response than measures like that can really address. The community is divided in at least two ways: on the issues themselves, and also on the HN discussions about them.
  - DanBC 12y ago
    {That link returns a "no such item" for me. EDIT: Thanks Minmaxir; not sure why I missed something so obvious} I used to flag a lot of these stories as soon as I saw them. I stopped doing that and now I wait until the discussion turns toxic - which it almost always does - before I flag them. I'm not sure that waiting for the conversations to turn awful is a useful tactic. Also, it would be great to know if there was vote-ring style detection on some of these threads. It feels pretty clear that there is infiltration from RedPill like posters who vote and post in groups, but I am aware that this is strongly playing to my biases and perhaps it's just people who happen to agree with each other.
- thrownaway999 12y ago
  Do you really want a meaningful discussion, or a discussion where PC opinions are upvoted and critical voices are downvoted/banned by dang? There are a lot of us who think that the code you write matters more than the gonads you carry or the color of your skin. We're quickly becoming pariahs as our workplaces become more politicized. I don't know why more people don't understand that equality of opportunity is perfectly compatible with inequality of outcomes. Does nobody read Harrison Bergeron anymore?
  - MartinCron 12y ago
    I don't know why more people don't understand that equality of opportunity is perfectly compatible with inequality of outcomes It's an easy theoretical thing to understand, it would be good to see equality of opportunity in practice.
  - Dewie 12y ago
    > Do you really want a meaningful discussion, or a discussion where PC opinions are upvoted and critical voices are downvoted/banned by dang? I find it funny. Some controversial or just plain stupid opinion gets posted, dang responds to it with basically "I disapprove of this post soooo much, and I'm glad that HN does too, judging by the downvotes. Pats HN on the head". Then a whole bunch of regular users reply with how awesome his reply was for telling the poster that he was an idiot/bigot. I mean, they can of course moderate or whatever in whatever way they want to. I just don't understand why so many are fascinated by it.
- Dewie 12y ago
  Maybe they are flagged precisely because those topics don't lead to meaningful debates? Take any slightly controversial (or can be spun to be controversial) gender-and-tech issue, submit it to HN: if it gains traction, it will consist of hundreds of posts with two kinds of people who have so little common ground and set of mutual opinions/world-views that they can not do anything but shout past each other. Meaningful discussion? Hardly.
_pius 12y ago
Glad the issue's being addressed, but sad that it dodges race almost completely. Making diversity all about gender is effectively playing the topic on "easy mode." Kinda lame, honestly.
- sama 12y ago
  it's really hard to address everything in one post, and i think the issues around gender and race in tech are pretty different. (we did include a stat on international founders, many of which are not white.) i don't think we're playing this on "easy mode", but i'm sorry you feel that way.
  - jfc 12y ago
    Many people deal with both gender and race issues simultaneously. Non-white women in the U.S. are 18%+ of the population (over 1/3 of the U.S. female population). It's easy to think of gender/race as an either or, but for many of us it's a both/and. I've written a book on the subject (diverse women/women of color), and have done a good bit of research in this area which is why I am familiar with the numbers and the issues. Feel free to reach out if you'd like additional information. Edit: This isn't meant to discourage; the post is a good start. Just wanted to provide some information for next time.
  - _pius 12y ago
    it's really hard to address everything in one post, and i think the issues around gender and race in tech are pretty different. Sure, but you clearly didn't call the piece "Gender and Startups" or "Sexism and Startups." Presumably the broader title was chosen deliberately. For instance, I'd push back on an essay called "YC and Startups" if it only mentioned one company in one batch, but with a quick token sentence about other batches. i don't think we're playing this on "easy mode", but i'm sorry you feel that way. What can I say? It's a piece that scores points for "addressing diversity" but only substantively discusses the less controversial, more tractable subtopic of sexism. Excited to read the upcoming, more inclusive posts though.
    - 12y ago
ctide 12y ago
Will all the misogynist trolls still come out to play on this one given that it's a YC post?
gizmo 12y ago
This was a well written post and I think it shows that sama gets it. A little bit of slope makes up for a lot of y-intercept, as a post argued a few days ago. This is also the case here. If we all push for a more equitable Silicon Valley then we can make loads of progress in a short time. The rate of progress is more important than how much behind we are. Many of us here are idealists. We don't want to work on any product, we want to make a great product. We want to do the right things. We want to use best practices and we want to hold ourselves and others to high moral standards. To make Silicon Valley a place of equal opportunity (regardless of gender, race, sexual orientation, etc) we have to fight prejudices where they exist and we have to hold each other to this high standard too. This may come at a cost in the short term. Hiring your college buddies is easy. Building a qualified diversified team is hard. But making this extra effort is worth it. It's worth it because there is an unbelievable amount of talent out there that is excluded from SV as it exists today. It's unjust and a tremendous waste of human capital.
tomjen3 12y ago
>Debating how to fix it is important, but debating whether or not sexism actually exists trivializes the problem in a toxic way You are walking into an extremely dangerous territory here. If reasonable people can disagree with you on the points you are not willing to debate (such as the widespread existence of sexism in tech[1]) or (worse) that you find morally wrong to debate then those reasonable people will not consider you reasonable - not only do you then lose any chance of changing their perspective, you will also create a schism in the community. This is what has happened in the US over guns, to the point where there is now no hope of reconciliation. For example I could counter the few well published incident by pointing out that the media cherrypick a few stories and them run with them - what you see in the media is not an unbiased sample. A few stories from a large enough group does not mean that the group is especially sexist, it just means that it has a few assholes in it. We don't know whether the asshole procentage is higher or lower than in the general population and we don't know that if it is higher, whether there is some third-party variable (such as a general disregard for rules) common to both tech people and sexist assholes or whether the causality runs the other way (ie assholes are more likely to be tech guys because they don't work well with people). Before we bring out the big guns and tear this community (which I highly value) apart, can we please have some independent, unbiased, studies - both as to the extend and effect of sexism and what causes it? Armed with this knowledge, we will be in a much better position to find out how, if at all, we should address this issue. [1]: There is sexism in any sufficiently large group of people, independent of the field you gather the group from. What is more interesting is how large a percentage of the group is sexist.
- sama 12y ago
  debating the extent of the problem of sexism is in tech relative to other fields is very different from saying "there is no sexism in tech at all"
- epistasis 12y ago
  One of the ways that people slow down progress, in startups or in society, is by resisting unreasonably at every step in a series of steps in an argument. If you want to debate that, that's fine, just do it somewhere else. It appears that Y Combinator has accepted the ample evidence of the presence of sexism in tech, and is focusing discussion away from existence, and towards the next necessary steps. Rehashing the evidence of the previous step may be an OK exercise, but it's not the most fruitful step right now. HN doesn't have to be everything to everybody, it gets to be what it wants to be.
yumraj 12y ago
What about ageism?
- whybroke 12y ago
  Well, comments raising the issue are almost universally down-voted without comment. I imagine that tells us quite a bit.
  - tptacek 12y ago
    It does not tell us that all the downvoters believe ageism not to be an issue.
    - whybroke 12y ago
      It means the conversation is not welcome here. Which, given the prevalence of discussion on similar issues, does indeed tell us a lot.
      - tptacek 12y ago
        That depends on what you mean by "here". This thread? Yes.
Castlereagh 12y ago
People who are not white males... I know it's hard to believe, but relative to their proportion in the workforce white males are slightly underrepresented in tech. Additionally, people of color are dramatically overrepresented. It's easy to march under the banner of "men in tech shouldn't act like sexist jerks"—what kind of sexist jerk could object to that?—but the more accurate slogan "we need many fewer Asian males in tech" doesn't sound quite so nice. In fact, it sounds rather nasty. And yet, it's the inevitable implication of increasing diversity.
- tomasien 12y ago
  Are they under-represented in terms of being founders/CEOs/Execs? I don't think I've ever seen that argued.
- jiggy2011 12y ago
  Do you have any figures on tech as a whole? The thing that I'm never sure about in these discussions (on any on HN really) is whether people are talking about "tech" to include people working 9-5 in IT at a bank somewhere or whether it really means "venture capital backed startups operating out of California".
  - crassus 12y ago
    I'm hell banned, but if you can see me then this post is useful: http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_22094415/asian-workers-now-dominate-silicon-valley-tech-jobs http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_22094415/asian-workers-now-dom...
  - crassus2 12y ago
    The San Jose Mercury News estimated that Silicon Valley tech jobs are mostly held by Asians. http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_22094415/asian-workers-now-dominate-silicon-valley-tech-jobs http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_22094415/asian-workers-now-dom... Based on my experience, I'd believe it, though the proportion is likely less in San Francisco and more in the South Bay.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
jfc 12y ago
On some level, the tech world isn't living up to its own principles, as it relates to diversity and inclusion (D&I). Many seem to view D&I as being somewhat external to the tech space--it's an issue that other industries have been discussing and is becoming more prominent in tech. I would posit that the underlying principles of the tech world share a number of core values with D&I. Think about the open source software movement (OSS). One crucial perspective that the OSS shares with D&I is that both view discrimination as an impediment to progress. OSS licenses include several non-discrimination clauses (economic, field of endeavor, other restrictions). The licenses go to great lengths to ensure the technology is available to everyone. When you think about the "Cathedral and Bazaar" models of software development, which one is naturally more diverse? The hierarchical, exclusive cathedral, with its rigid structure, serious gatekeepers, and highly-credentialed leadership? Or is it the open air bazaar, with all kinds of people talking (softly or loudly) in a place known for public discourse. A place where anyone can walk by and join in and become part of what's going on? My point is that the underlying precepts of D&I are similar to principles that already exist in the tech world. So this isn't really about embracing D&I. Instead, the tech community needs to start living up to its own rhetoric--it's own values. This isn't about adopting an external issue, it's about a community fully aligning with its own values.
- morgante 12y ago
  I wholeheartedly agree, yet certain people continually attach open source as somehow being the worst of our industry. Just because it requires people be passionate enough about development to do it in their free time.
  - lliwta 12y ago
    To be fair, github culture is a far cry from the early days of open source. If I didn't run in with the first/second generation of OSS developers, I probably wouldn't like the culture either. Now get off my lawn!
  - seanflyon 12y ago
    I don't think I've ever met anyone who thinks open source shouldn't exist. I know quite a few people who don't want to open source everything they make.
clairity 12y ago
as a half-asian female founder with a diverse team (mexican, german), this is a intimate issue for me. i'm really glad to see the topic being discussed, but it really is the first small step. sexism & racism isn't something that people do consciously. that's why there's such a backlash against it because most of us can honestly say that we're not consciously sexist or racist. these prejudices are systemic biases that flow through all of us. it takes hard introspection and compensatory mechanisms from each person to address the structural underpinnings that create the biases. it's really hard. as sama notes, the discussion needs to move towards these underlying mechanisms, rather than getting mired in the stale discussion of whether prejudices exist or not (they do).
kika 12y ago
Let's say I have a magic wand which will make all -isms go away in one waving. I waved, -isms went away and now what? Where do I hire skilled black female CoffeeScript developers? How many of them do actually exist? I'm insider/outsider - I live in the US now, in Bay Area, but I went to school in the country which doesn't even exist anymore, while my daughter goes to the one of the best middle schools around here. And I see her genuine interest in math, she's among a group of 'popular' girls in the school, where the popularity is judged not (only) by the looks or clothes, but to what "Math Honor", "Advanced Geometry", etc class the student was admitted to. So it's not just her, there's a solid group of (mostly white though) girls interested in math and other similar topics. Where these girls disappear later? I understand that I'll learn this in a hard way later, but if there're valid theories out there, may be I'd be able to prevent her from losing interest in math, special video effects, photography, optics, etc. Something tells me it's not just our (white tech male population) sexism, it's a problem rooted deeper.
- bqe 12y ago
  There are systemic and cultural biases against women in math and in technical fields. Women are driven out of these fields by people in them. If you had a magic wand, women wouldn't be driven out, so there would be more women in professions that have biases against women.
- king_jester 12y ago
  > Let's say I have a magic wand which will make all -isms go away in one waving. I waved, -isms went away and now what? Where do I hire skilled black female CoffeeScript developers? This is a bit strange to say. If there were less barriers for people in tech, there would be more of different kinds of people in tech. Indeed, combating sexism and racism in tech should, in time, lead to more participation from people who currently are not in or leave tech quickly. > So it's not just her, there's a solid group of (mostly white though) girls interested in math and other similar topics. Where these girls disappear later? There are a variety of reasons why women do not pursue STEM that may happen at various times of their lives. If you want to know why that happens, you'd best look for the written experiences of woman and the reasons why they left. There's been quite a lot of blogging by some of those women on the subject. > I understand that I'll learn this in a hard way later, but if there're valid theories out there, may be I'd be able to prevent her from losing interest in math, special video effects, photography, optics, etc. Being supportive is great, but keep in mind you won't have the same experience as your child, esp. considering they are living in a different time and with a different gender. There ultimately may be, in fact, nothing you can do. But in this case your best bet is to read about the experience women have faced in STEM and share those resources. > Something tells me it's not just our (white tech male population) sexism, it's a problem rooted deeper. Sexism is both interpersonal and institutional, the deeper roots of the problem is still sexism and misogyny, among other things.
staunch 12y ago
What about class? Ivy League Parents -> Private School -> SAT tutoring -> Ivy League College -> Investment by Ivy League VC -> Acquired by Ivy League Tech Company vs Poor parents -> Shitty Public School -> High School Drop Out -> Programmer at Ivy League Tech Company (maybe) There's a reason most of the big tech companies are from Ivy League graduates. And you can't ignore how many successful startups only happened because parental financial support. Someone working paycheck to paycheck to pay for college isn't going to have a reading week to hack with. Or can't borrow $40k from their parents. Or live at home for free. The game is ultimately fair - even a dog could get funded with traction. But there really is a class system in the U.S. and it is probably the biggest bias in the system.
- argonaut 12y ago
  Minor nit, which is that all the top CS (and engineering, for that matter) schools are not Ivy League schools: MIT, Berkeley, Stanford, CMU. And I've never heard of top tech companies being referred to as Ivy League tech companies. But your point is still valid when you talk about "top schools."
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
  - famousactress 12y ago
    Ah, the irony of making sure we're careful to make subtle distinctions about the top fraction of a percent of the population... in response to a comment about massive class imbalance.
    - argonaut 12y ago
      Your words, not mine. My actual intention was to get the OP to move away from an emphasis on the "Ivy League" brand, which I think people need to stop putting up on a pedestal.
spacehome 12y ago
> Sexism in tech is real. Honest question: Is there any unambiguous evidence of this?
brianbreslin 12y ago
Would expanding the geographic sourcing of startups help with diversity? Cities like Miami, which is 75% hispanic, our startups are as diverse as our city. However I only recall a couple ever getting into YC (note, I have no idea of the merits of any others who applied). So could sourcing from more diverse cities help YC ?
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
- tptacek 12y ago
  The post title would be less offensive if you read the article more carefully, since it explicitly addresses ethnicity. And of course, calling foul when an article about diversity prioritizes gender issues is a way to trivialize gender issues. Was that your intent? Surely not, but the toxic subtext is there nonetheless.
argonaut 12y ago
One objection I have is with hackathons. From my observations most hackathons aren't particularly inclusive environments - they may do more harm than good. Examples include the intense focus on competition and prizes (I didn't think it was a good idea for YC Hacks to explicitly advertise the prize of getting an interview), the fact that many hackathons now have applications processes where more applicants are rejected than accepted (so that the net effect is more exclusion than inclusion), and the general vibe of having to power through the night with redbull while cranking out code. Most hackathons I've attended I've usually gotten this exclusive, rather than inclusive vibe. From my own experiences, the most exclusive hackathons have been the larger, more monied, more applied-to ones that have more applicants than attendees. The most inclusive hackathons have been smaller, intimate hackathons where the problem has been not having enough attendees! EDIT (reply to below): I'm referring to the general feeling of inclusion vs. exclusion (of newcomers, people not sure if they fit the mold of <quote>hardcore<unquote> coders, etc.). The next step is to argue that exclusion discourages minorities from pursuing the field.
- tptacek 12y ago
  Why is competition a diversity problem? To me, the idea that aggressive competition selects for a specific age, gender, or ethnicity is itself problematic. Not to mention that I think that's not true.
  - benmathes 12y ago
    Broadly speaking, competition definitely creates sex-based selection-bias. Men self-select into competitions more than women, and are more motivated by them. http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/brain-wise/201210/when-competition-helps-and-hurts-motivation http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/brain-wise/201210/when-c... https://www3.nd.edu/~wevans1/fresh_honor_seminar/vesterland.pdf https://www3.nd.edu/~wevans1/fresh_honor_seminar/vesterland.... I am not saying men are more capable, just more likely to self-select into the competition. Read up on what professional coaches of womens vs mens teams say.
    - tptacek 12y ago
dothething 12y ago
The only age you see in any of these is percentage. Diversity shouldn't be a whatever convenient cause you want to look progressive on.
adamzerner 12y ago
1) I suspect that the bias against girls is "I don't think she'll be effective" rather than "I am sexist and don't want girls to succeed". 2) The bias doesn't seem to be that strong to me. This is a simplification, but I'd guess that girls start with about a 10% handicap. Meaning that in close cases, girls lose out. But in the cases of girls who clearly have ability, I don't see the bias against them as something that will prevent them from being successful. 3) A more important question is "what can we do about it?". I agree with the idea to showcase successful women. I think it'll help a little. But obviously it isn't anything close to a solution by itself. Option 1: If people were less biassed in the general sense, the bias against girls would be reduced. I think that making people less biased in the general sense is an important goal, but ultimately unlikely to happen for some time. Option 2: As there are more and more instances of girls having success, people will start to view girls as more competent, and the bias will be reduced. I think the fastest way to reduce the bias against girls is to increase the amount of successful girls. The question then becomes, "how do you do that?". This is getting long so I won't go into this too much... but I think it needs to be active rather than passive. Don't just sit there and wait for them to come to you asking for help. Go out there and inspire and persuade them.
- tptacek 12y ago
  The belief that African Americans were literally inferior to European Americans animated most of 20th century racism, so this observation is probably less helpful than your otherwise clear writing makes it sound. "Girls" is probably not the word you want to be using, by the way.
  - adamzerner 12y ago
    > The belief that African Americans were literally inferior to European Americans animated most of 20th century racism, so this observation is probably less helpful than your otherwise clear writing makes it sound. I'm afraid I may have implied something I didn't mean to imply. I'm not sure what you mean by "this observation". I didn't mean to imply that people see girls as "literally inferior". Just that people probably think they're less likely to be competent. > "Girls" is probably not the word you want to be using, by the way. I'm saying girls to be all encompassing. "Women" just includes adults. And "females" sounds weird, like dehumanizing.
whybroke 12y ago
Its fantastic the gender issue is being looked at. And it's nice that non-US citizens are funded. But what percentage of the founders were pg's age or older?
- alexanderss 12y ago
  What percentage of applicants are his age or older? Probably very, very small for obvious reasons. Most founders PG's age and older have more financial resources (and network, etc) making YC's terms less appealing than for younger founders without any experience. In terms of diversity, age doesn't quite fit in here.
  - whybroke 12y ago
    19% female applicants were accepted, and 24% applicants were female. 39% accepted applicants were from outside the US. 0% of founders were anywhere near pg's age. Are all Entrepreneurs under 40? Not remotely. But more astounding: You would never get tech industry leaders saying "men are just smarter" or "whites are just smarter" yet Zuckerberg makes exactly that statement for agism. And he made that statement at a Y Combinator Startup event. So re your "obvious reasons", it is not that every one over 40 is rich, it is that few intelligent people over say 40 would be fool enough to go near those organizations given that very public attitude.
    - tptacek 12y ago
      Pretty sure "0% of founders were anywhere near pg's age" is false.
      - whybroke 12y ago
        Is that really your only observation about the utterly extreme public positions I mentioned above? Very well. Name one.
        tptacek 12y ago
a2kadet 12y ago
Any fans of the Office? http://youtu.be/FTOgm_EMgVI?t=12m8s http://youtu.be/FTOgm_EMgVI?t=12m8s These statements always seem really empty to me.
incision 12y ago
I appreciate that this post takes the time to acknowledge a few specific problems along with suggestions for actions. I haven't seen much of the former in diversity releases - just 'diversity' on its own as if the word alone represents both every possible problem and validates the proposed solutions. It's hard to put into few words, but as I think of it, diversity is neutral - it's just a measure and the goal shouldn't be dragging it one way or another just reducing friction. EDIT: To be clear, when I refer to friction I mean any barriers beyond individual control which prevent people, whoever, wherever from entering and/or excelling in the field.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
wudf 12y ago
Let me get this straight: YCombinator is pledging to snub investors who conduct sexist and racist abuses toward founders? I know we'll face adversity, and I want our team to be able to stand up for our beliefs without getting fucked by the tight-night nature of the community.
throwaway420 12y ago
> We’re encouraging our startups to get HR infrastructure in place earlier. If there's one thing that a fast and nimble startup DOES NOT NEED, it's HR drones trying to assert themselves into the startup. This is great news for us that compete with YC companies because it means that you're going to be handcuffing yourselves and bogging yourselves down employees who are literally a negative to the bottom line. > Specifically, we’d like the community to help by downvoting comments that make HN an unwelcoming place to anyone. In other words, you want to address diversity by stamping out any ideas that are contrary to the modern politically correct BS that most people here are dulled into believing.
- lzecon 12y ago
  HR for startups wouldn't and shouldn't be like HR for big companies. It doesn't have to slow a company down at all, and it's definitely a function that can enhance a company culture in really positive ways without dampening it. However, if you think sexual harassment doesn't happen in small startups, you're not paying attention. At the end of the day, HR is a mediator for the company to protect it from lawsuits. HR can stop a little issue from turning into a big, expensive issue, which is positive for both the company and employees.
- mmodahl 12y ago
  > In other words, you want to address diversity by stamping out any ideas that are contrary to the modern politically correct BS that most people here are dulled into believing. My natural reaction to this comment is Plonk. But I realize that is only perpetuating the problem. I have the luxury of ignoring you. I have the luxury of ignoring whoever I want to. Many people don't. And maybe that is exactly what you are trying to point out: if we try to solve this by using group consensus to ignore/block/killfile idiots/fools/bigots, what happens 1-on-1. So in response: I also have experienced situations where HR doesn't really add anything, but maybe someone can come up with a way to do HR. I don't think it is just politically correct BS.
- melindajb 12y ago
  What you fail to recognize is that YC is funding a disproportionately large number of founders who have little to no work experience. this leads to situations where the founders have no idea how to protect their company(including their investors) from harassment and discrimination lawsuits, or the attendant PR nightmare that hurts all their fellow batchmates. I happen to think this is not enough but at a minimum I've always found it rather surprising that the money invested in these companies didn't want to protect it from the stupidity that is inherent in most young people. To be clear, I mean this as stupidity of youth, ignorance, naivete. At bare minimum YC needs to require its founders to be trained in some basic legal 101 stuff since they haven't yet had to learn it on the job in a corporation. (and hey, If I'm going to make a wishlist, add some leadership training to this, too. If you want to make young people into CEOs you need to teach them how to do it. Building a great product is absolutely NOT synonymous with building a great company. If experience has no value to them in hiring, they're learning that somewhere, and it needs to be corrected by the investors--if not for the morality of responsibility to young people looking to them for guidance, but to vouchsafe their own investment.)
thrownaway999 12y ago
Could someone convince me why I should care about the gonads and skin color of the people writing code for me? Does anybody really think YC's performance would be better if their founder classes looked like a diversity picture from a college recruiting brochure?
- designNERD 12y ago
  You don't understand the importance of having different perspectives represented when you are making products and services for everyone? Seems pretty simple to me.
  - crassus2 12y ago
    Could you point out for me where Sam talks about diversity of perspectives? All I see him talking about is what the OP mentions - gonads and skin color.
    - araneae 12y ago
      Gonads and skin color are correlated with a diversity of perspectives. All you have to do is look at the perspectives r/TwoX versus r/all, for instance, or Twitter vs. HN. For instance, just see the period panties thread. Men don't have the perspective necessary to even comprehend the idea of period panties, let alone build one. Not everything in tech is that obvious, of course. But it's worth thinking about non-obvious ways in which it might.
- DanBC 12y ago
  You avoid a lawsuit that destroys your company.
lacus 12y ago
YC is starting to take a lot of the right steps. I know for me personally, as a female founder, my attitude has changed a lot in the past 6-8 months (from "I guess I'll keep reading HN & essays because I don't want to miss out on interesting content... but I don't feel good about it, and I'd definitely never apply" -- to now being able to be an unequivocal fan, attending Startup School, etc.). Honestly, any effort at all is appreciated, although some efforts count for more than others. For instance, the Female Founders conference is fine, but I (and I think a lot of people) probably assign more credibility to efforts that really demonstrate a depth of thought on the issue. Here's a tiny example of what I mean, just from this essay, in fact: I always see VCs and journalists citing to the percent of portfolio companies that have a female founder, and every time I see this, it makes me think they're not really serious about analyzing the dimensions and complexity of the issue ("Out of how many founders TOTAL, not how many companies??"), so the fact that SA at least pointed this out puts this piece above not only other investor posts but also posts by tech journalists -- people whose very job it is to, you know, point this stuff out. That's a tiny example, but to me it counts for a lot more than just boilerplate "we support women blah blah blah." [1] The same principle probably applies for what kinds of events/projects you sponsor. "Women in tech" conferences are great and all, but the more innovative (and tangibly helpful) the initiative is, the better. I'm not sure what your suggestion/feedback mechanism for this is besides HN and talking to your own portfolio, but it may be worth setting up another channel to get ideas from current non-YC technical women/female founders (maybe anonymously, or at least in a more conducive forum than the HN comment section). Anyway, just my thoughts. I second the other comments about the importance of race/class diversity, too, but I don't have as much to add on that. (Not that race needed to be tackled in this particular post but the title maybe shouldn't have used the term "diversity" if it's mainly going to be about gender.) [1] It also affords YC/SA a bit more benefit of the doubt when the post also asserts some, uh, less-well-thought-through things, e.g., that other industries are doing worse than tech on gender issues. (Like who? Who's doing worse, specifically? I literally can't think of a single industry in 2014 America that's doing worse than the startup/tech community [both statistically and anecdotally, as well as based on my own personal experience]. Not even investment banking -- and certainly not medicine, law, academia, or traditional business. It's not helpful to sugarcoat it.)
- 12y ago
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
onmydesk 12y ago
I started watching 'Portlandia' for the first time a couple of weeks ago. Its basically the HN readership. Funny stuff. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8IfOKeZ-MWI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8IfOKeZ-MWI
alexyes 12y ago
Things will get better in the future, as CS education is becoming accessible to more people.
yypark 12y ago
First off, I applaud YC's efforts in this sphere to give all groups more opportunity to participate in startups and tech in general. I do not mean to disparage efforts or "derail" a conversation, but to bring up the fundamental question once the low-hanging fruit - discrimination, etc. is gone - self-selection and equality of result as a goal. Any diversity discussion will eventually reach the awkward points of over-represented minorities and self-selection, which negatively impact numerical diversity: There are some elements of the industry that will inherently self-select for groups. Asian males are currently the most over-represented group - racially due to US immigration policy and cultural factors encouraging many recent immigrants to go into technical fields and not humanities. Men tend to self-select into higher risk and highly competitive environments - e.g. startups, hackathons [1] but also ones with negative outcomes - crime, gambling addiction - see the 9-to-1 ratio of incarcerated men to women. (Denying the evidence for risk-taking and self-selection is to me, similar to denying evidence that sexism exists -- on the face of not wanting to confront it). At what point do these become issues to address? It seems like the desired result is not the strawman, Harrison Bergeron, 100% representative (of what? the US? the world?) demographic, so what is the desired outcome? I'm for eliminating discrimination and bias, but I don't think this will leave us with a 50-50 perfectly balanced startup scene, but it's the most fair. You would either have to change humans' own free-will preferences for risk, or the nature of the industry (with other side effects). If you have ideas on this, I'm open to hearing them. This is a legitimate question - shutting down discussion here in the name of being "against progress" or trivializing the issue is highly reminiscent of Paul Graham's warnings in "What You Can't Say [2]. The demographic balance of any industry or field is always in constant flux, and heavily influenced by self-selection and non-discriminatory factors. We need to remove discrimination, but also know that a fair outcome in the absence of discrimination - with equal opportunity does not necessarily lead to perfectly equal outcomes. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8087536 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8087536 "Broadly speaking, competition definitely creates sex-based selection-bias. Men self-select into competitions more than women, and are more motivated by them. http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/brain-wise/201210/when-competition-helps-and-hurts-motivation http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/brain-wise/201210/when-c... https://www3.nd.edu/~wevans1/fresh_honor_seminar/vesterland.pdf https://www3.nd.edu/~wevans1/fresh_honor_seminar/vesterland.... " [2] http://paulgraham.com/say.html http://paulgraham.com/say.html
tuxidomasx 12y ago
As mentioned in some other comments, the post focuses more on gender than ethnicity. As a 31 year old African American male in tech, some of the challenges for black males and females that I've witnessed range from cultural mismatches to being under-valued and therefore underutilized. There's also a lot of stress and pressure associated with often being the only black person in the room throughout most of your STEM education and career. For startups specifically, I've often heard of "pattern matching" as a manifestation of bias for white and asian males. If we're looking for a cause of the lack of ethnic diversity, we can't ignore the socially uninviting nature of the environment. Many of the solutions that have helped counter these challenges for me and a lot of my peers have been programs, organizations, and networks that focus on creating a culturally targeted atmosphere. Professional organizations like the National Society of Black Engineers really go a long way in encouraging minorities to pursue careers in technology. And within the startup community, I think programs like the NewMe accelerator meet a very specific and important need. Instead of just corralling minorities into tech companies or startups where they will still be underrepresented, there is a benefit in encouraging them to create their own companies where they can foster a cultural climate that naturally appeals to their ethnic peers.

160 points by dmnd 12y ago

> Specifically, we’d like the community to help by downvoting comments that make HN an unwelcoming place to anyone. That's only a solution for half of the problem on Hacker News. The other half is that most submissions about gender/diversity get flagged to death very consistently, which make it difficult to have any meaningful discussion about these topics.

Permit 12y ago
We have no way to tell if they're being flagged by users or setting off the automated system for detecting flamewars. One of the problems with the topic is that essentially every Hacker News reader feels as though they're qualified to comment on the topic. This translates into massive nested threads that blow up with people arguing the same points. I'm not convinced that discussion of these issues on Hacker News does anything to push the ball forward. I have yet to meet the person who changed their position on the subject due to an internet argument.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- minimaxir 12y ago
  About a year ago, a friend wrote a good post about diversity in hackathons which was submitted to HN and hit #2 quickly, then dropped down to the second page in an instant: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6495950 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6495950 Not many people commented on it. I believe the flame-war detector only takes significant effect when # comments > # points, which is a pretty good heuristic for a flame war that has gone out of control.
  - Permit 12y ago
    Haha it's funny that you've cited that post as I'm complaining that it's getting flagged in the comments... I guess the point is that HN is a black box to us regular users and it's tough to speculate on how and why threads move as they do.
  - dang 12y ago
    For what it's worth at this late date, that post set off the voting ring detector. No users flagged it and no moderator moderated it.
    - minimaxir 12y ago
      That clarifies that mystery :P. Thanks!
    - nbm 12y ago
      Any chance of getting some transparency of what automated or manual processes have affected a particular story (ie, on the story comment page itself), possibly delayed by some period to prevent bad actors from realising their voting rings or whatever were discovered?
- king_jester 12y ago
  > We have no way to tell if they're being flagged by users or setting off the automated system for detecting flamewars. This is the fundamental problem. No matter how a story gets made invisible, once it gets in that state nobody knows how it got there and whether or not it was justified. Not to mention that no matter how those stories vanish, HN (by community or systems) is not facilitating discussion on diversity, sexism, racism, etc. in tech.
tomjen3 12y ago
I have never seen an interesting discussion on that subject where I came away being smarter or having learned something new. On the other hand I have had such discussions suck many hours away. I understand that this is a topic very dear to many peoples hearts, but it seems like one of those things that are just not a good fit for HN.
dang 12y ago
> The other half is that most submissions about gender/diversity get flagged to death very consistently, which make it difficult to have any meaningful discussion about these topics. It isn't user flagging that makes meaningful discussion difficult. It's the discussers, unfortunately, who are doing that. I wonder if you may have cause and effect reversed here. Also, it isn't true that most of these submissions get flagged to death. Some do, but most don't, so in most cases the discussions continue. Moderators also sometimes unkill stories that were flag-killed, precisely so discussions can continue. (An example from last night is https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8083596 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8083596).
- zorpner 12y ago
  Do people who routinely flag stories about diversity in tech have their flagging privileges revoked?
  - dang 12y ago
    We don't really revoke flagging privileges much anymore; mostly just for obvious abuse. Are you wondering whether revoking selected users' flagging privileges would change the balance on these stories? I doubt it would. We're talking about a larger-scale response than measures like that can really address. The community is divided in at least two ways: on the issues themselves, and also on the HN discussions about them.
- DanBC 12y ago
  {That link returns a "no such item" for me. EDIT: Thanks Minmaxir; not sure why I missed something so obvious} I used to flag a lot of these stories as soon as I saw them. I stopped doing that and now I wait until the discussion turns toxic - which it almost always does - before I flag them. I'm not sure that waiting for the conversations to turn awful is a useful tactic. Also, it would be great to know if there was vote-ring style detection on some of these threads. It feels pretty clear that there is infiltration from RedPill like posters who vote and post in groups, but I am aware that this is strongly playing to my biases and perhaps it's just people who happen to agree with each other.
thrownaway999 12y ago
Do you really want a meaningful discussion, or a discussion where PC opinions are upvoted and critical voices are downvoted/banned by dang? There are a lot of us who think that the code you write matters more than the gonads you carry or the color of your skin. We're quickly becoming pariahs as our workplaces become more politicized. I don't know why more people don't understand that equality of opportunity is perfectly compatible with inequality of outcomes. Does nobody read Harrison Bergeron anymore?
- MartinCron 12y ago
  I don't know why more people don't understand that equality of opportunity is perfectly compatible with inequality of outcomes It's an easy theoretical thing to understand, it would be good to see equality of opportunity in practice.
- Dewie 12y ago
  > Do you really want a meaningful discussion, or a discussion where PC opinions are upvoted and critical voices are downvoted/banned by dang? I find it funny. Some controversial or just plain stupid opinion gets posted, dang responds to it with basically "I disapprove of this post soooo much, and I'm glad that HN does too, judging by the downvotes. Pats HN on the head". Then a whole bunch of regular users reply with how awesome his reply was for telling the poster that he was an idiot/bigot. I mean, they can of course moderate or whatever in whatever way they want to. I just don't understand why so many are fascinated by it.
Dewie 12y ago
Maybe they are flagged precisely because those topics don't lead to meaningful debates? Take any slightly controversial (or can be spun to be controversial) gender-and-tech issue, submit it to HN: if it gains traction, it will consist of hundreds of posts with two kinds of people who have so little common ground and set of mutual opinions/world-views that they can not do anything but shout past each other. Meaningful discussion? Hardly.

_pius 12y ago

Glad the issue's being addressed, but sad that it dodges race almost completely. Making diversity all about gender is effectively playing the topic on "easy mode." Kinda lame, honestly.

sama 12y ago
it's really hard to address everything in one post, and i think the issues around gender and race in tech are pretty different. (we did include a stat on international founders, many of which are not white.) i don't think we're playing this on "easy mode", but i'm sorry you feel that way.
- jfc 12y ago
  Many people deal with both gender and race issues simultaneously. Non-white women in the U.S. are 18%+ of the population (over 1/3 of the U.S. female population). It's easy to think of gender/race as an either or, but for many of us it's a both/and. I've written a book on the subject (diverse women/women of color), and have done a good bit of research in this area which is why I am familiar with the numbers and the issues. Feel free to reach out if you'd like additional information. Edit: This isn't meant to discourage; the post is a good start. Just wanted to provide some information for next time.
- _pius 12y ago
  it's really hard to address everything in one post, and i think the issues around gender and race in tech are pretty different. Sure, but you clearly didn't call the piece "Gender and Startups" or "Sexism and Startups." Presumably the broader title was chosen deliberately. For instance, I'd push back on an essay called "YC and Startups" if it only mentioned one company in one batch, but with a quick token sentence about other batches. i don't think we're playing this on "easy mode", but i'm sorry you feel that way. What can I say? It's a piece that scores points for "addressing diversity" but only substantively discusses the less controversial, more tractable subtopic of sexism. Excited to read the upcoming, more inclusive posts though.
  - 12y ago

ctide 12y ago

Will all the misogynist trolls still come out to play on this one given that it's a YC post?

gizmo 12y ago

This was a well written post and I think it shows that sama gets it. A little bit of slope makes up for a lot of y-intercept, as a post argued a few days ago. This is also the case here. If we all push for a more equitable Silicon Valley then we can make loads of progress in a short time. The rate of progress is more important than how much behind we are. Many of us here are idealists. We don't want to work on any product, we want to make a great product. We want to do the right things. We want to use best practices and we want to hold ourselves and others to high moral standards. To make Silicon Valley a place of equal opportunity (regardless of gender, race, sexual orientation, etc) we have to fight prejudices where they exist and we have to hold each other to this high standard too. This may come at a cost in the short term. Hiring your college buddies is easy. Building a qualified diversified team is hard. But making this extra effort is worth it. It's worth it because there is an unbelievable amount of talent out there that is excluded from SV as it exists today. It's unjust and a tremendous waste of human capital.

tomjen3 12y ago

>Debating how to fix it is important, but debating whether or not sexism actually exists trivializes the problem in a toxic way You are walking into an extremely dangerous territory here. If reasonable people can disagree with you on the points you are not willing to debate (such as the widespread existence of sexism in tech[1]) or (worse) that you find morally wrong to debate then those reasonable people will not consider you reasonable - not only do you then lose any chance of changing their perspective, you will also create a schism in the community. This is what has happened in the US over guns, to the point where there is now no hope of reconciliation. For example I could counter the few well published incident by pointing out that the media cherrypick a few stories and them run with them - what you see in the media is not an unbiased sample. A few stories from a large enough group does not mean that the group is especially sexist, it just means that it has a few assholes in it. We don't know whether the asshole procentage is higher or lower than in the general population and we don't know that if it is higher, whether there is some third-party variable (such as a general disregard for rules) common to both tech people and sexist assholes or whether the causality runs the other way (ie assholes are more likely to be tech guys because they don't work well with people). Before we bring out the big guns and tear this community (which I highly value) apart, can we please have some independent, unbiased, studies - both as to the extend and effect of sexism and what causes it? Armed with this knowledge, we will be in a much better position to find out how, if at all, we should address this issue. [1]: There is sexism in any sufficiently large group of people, independent of the field you gather the group from. What is more interesting is how large a percentage of the group is sexist.

sama 12y ago
debating the extent of the problem of sexism is in tech relative to other fields is very different from saying "there is no sexism in tech at all"
epistasis 12y ago
One of the ways that people slow down progress, in startups or in society, is by resisting unreasonably at every step in a series of steps in an argument. If you want to debate that, that's fine, just do it somewhere else. It appears that Y Combinator has accepted the ample evidence of the presence of sexism in tech, and is focusing discussion away from existence, and towards the next necessary steps. Rehashing the evidence of the previous step may be an OK exercise, but it's not the most fruitful step right now. HN doesn't have to be everything to everybody, it gets to be what it wants to be.

yumraj 12y ago

What about ageism?

whybroke 12y ago
Well, comments raising the issue are almost universally down-voted without comment. I imagine that tells us quite a bit.
- tptacek 12y ago
  It does not tell us that all the downvoters believe ageism not to be an issue.
  - whybroke 12y ago
    It means the conversation is not welcome here. Which, given the prevalence of discussion on similar issues, does indeed tell us a lot.
    - tptacek 12y ago
      That depends on what you mean by "here". This thread? Yes.

Castlereagh 12y ago

People who are not white males... I know it's hard to believe, but relative to their proportion in the workforce white males are slightly underrepresented in tech. Additionally, people of color are dramatically overrepresented. It's easy to march under the banner of "men in tech shouldn't act like sexist jerks"—what kind of sexist jerk could object to that?—but the more accurate slogan "we need many fewer Asian males in tech" doesn't sound quite so nice. In fact, it sounds rather nasty. And yet, it's the inevitable implication of increasing diversity.

tomasien 12y ago
Are they under-represented in terms of being founders/CEOs/Execs? I don't think I've ever seen that argued.
jiggy2011 12y ago
Do you have any figures on tech as a whole? The thing that I'm never sure about in these discussions (on any on HN really) is whether people are talking about "tech" to include people working 9-5 in IT at a bank somewhere or whether it really means "venture capital backed startups operating out of California".
- crassus 12y ago
  I'm hell banned, but if you can see me then this post is useful: http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_22094415/asian-workers-now-dominate-silicon-valley-tech-jobs http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_22094415/asian-workers-now-dom...
- crassus2 12y ago
  The San Jose Mercury News estimated that Silicon Valley tech jobs are mostly held by Asians. http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_22094415/asian-workers-now-dominate-silicon-valley-tech-jobs http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_22094415/asian-workers-now-dom... Based on my experience, I'd believe it, though the proportion is likely less in San Francisco and more in the South Bay.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]

jfc 12y ago

On some level, the tech world isn't living up to its own principles, as it relates to diversity and inclusion (D&I). Many seem to view D&I as being somewhat external to the tech space--it's an issue that other industries have been discussing and is becoming more prominent in tech. I would posit that the underlying principles of the tech world share a number of core values with D&I. Think about the open source software movement (OSS). One crucial perspective that the OSS shares with D&I is that both view discrimination as an impediment to progress. OSS licenses include several non-discrimination clauses (economic, field of endeavor, other restrictions). The licenses go to great lengths to ensure the technology is available to everyone. When you think about the "Cathedral and Bazaar" models of software development, which one is naturally more diverse? The hierarchical, exclusive cathedral, with its rigid structure, serious gatekeepers, and highly-credentialed leadership? Or is it the open air bazaar, with all kinds of people talking (softly or loudly) in a place known for public discourse. A place where anyone can walk by and join in and become part of what's going on? My point is that the underlying precepts of D&I are similar to principles that already exist in the tech world. So this isn't really about embracing D&I. Instead, the tech community needs to start living up to its own rhetoric--it's own values. This isn't about adopting an external issue, it's about a community fully aligning with its own values.

morgante 12y ago
I wholeheartedly agree, yet certain people continually attach open source as somehow being the worst of our industry. Just because it requires people be passionate enough about development to do it in their free time.
- lliwta 12y ago
  To be fair, github culture is a far cry from the early days of open source. If I didn't run in with the first/second generation of OSS developers, I probably wouldn't like the culture either. Now get off my lawn!
- seanflyon 12y ago
  I don't think I've ever met anyone who thinks open source shouldn't exist. I know quite a few people who don't want to open source everything they make.

clairity 12y ago

as a half-asian female founder with a diverse team (mexican, german), this is a intimate issue for me. i'm really glad to see the topic being discussed, but it really is the first small step. sexism & racism isn't something that people do consciously. that's why there's such a backlash against it because most of us can honestly say that we're not consciously sexist or racist. these prejudices are systemic biases that flow through all of us. it takes hard introspection and compensatory mechanisms from each person to address the structural underpinnings that create the biases. it's really hard. as sama notes, the discussion needs to move towards these underlying mechanisms, rather than getting mired in the stale discussion of whether prejudices exist or not (they do).

kika 12y ago

Let's say I have a magic wand which will make all -isms go away in one waving. I waved, -isms went away and now what? Where do I hire skilled black female CoffeeScript developers? How many of them do actually exist? I'm insider/outsider - I live in the US now, in Bay Area, but I went to school in the country which doesn't even exist anymore, while my daughter goes to the one of the best middle schools around here. And I see her genuine interest in math, she's among a group of 'popular' girls in the school, where the popularity is judged not (only) by the looks or clothes, but to what "Math Honor", "Advanced Geometry", etc class the student was admitted to. So it's not just her, there's a solid group of (mostly white though) girls interested in math and other similar topics. Where these girls disappear later? I understand that I'll learn this in a hard way later, but if there're valid theories out there, may be I'd be able to prevent her from losing interest in math, special video effects, photography, optics, etc. Something tells me it's not just our (white tech male population) sexism, it's a problem rooted deeper.

bqe 12y ago
There are systemic and cultural biases against women in math and in technical fields. Women are driven out of these fields by people in them. If you had a magic wand, women wouldn't be driven out, so there would be more women in professions that have biases against women.
king_jester 12y ago
> Let's say I have a magic wand which will make all -isms go away in one waving. I waved, -isms went away and now what? Where do I hire skilled black female CoffeeScript developers? This is a bit strange to say. If there were less barriers for people in tech, there would be more of different kinds of people in tech. Indeed, combating sexism and racism in tech should, in time, lead to more participation from people who currently are not in or leave tech quickly. > So it's not just her, there's a solid group of (mostly white though) girls interested in math and other similar topics. Where these girls disappear later? There are a variety of reasons why women do not pursue STEM that may happen at various times of their lives. If you want to know why that happens, you'd best look for the written experiences of woman and the reasons why they left. There's been quite a lot of blogging by some of those women on the subject. > I understand that I'll learn this in a hard way later, but if there're valid theories out there, may be I'd be able to prevent her from losing interest in math, special video effects, photography, optics, etc. Being supportive is great, but keep in mind you won't have the same experience as your child, esp. considering they are living in a different time and with a different gender. There ultimately may be, in fact, nothing you can do. But in this case your best bet is to read about the experience women have faced in STEM and share those resources. > Something tells me it's not just our (white tech male population) sexism, it's a problem rooted deeper. Sexism is both interpersonal and institutional, the deeper roots of the problem is still sexism and misogyny, among other things.

staunch 12y ago

What about class? Ivy League Parents -> Private School -> SAT tutoring -> Ivy League College -> Investment by Ivy League VC -> Acquired by Ivy League Tech Company vs Poor parents -> Shitty Public School -> High School Drop Out -> Programmer at Ivy League Tech Company (maybe) There's a reason most of the big tech companies are from Ivy League graduates. And you can't ignore how many successful startups only happened because parental financial support. Someone working paycheck to paycheck to pay for college isn't going to have a reading week to hack with. Or can't borrow $40k from their parents. Or live at home for free. The game is ultimately fair - even a dog could get funded with traction. But there really is a class system in the U.S. and it is probably the biggest bias in the system.

argonaut 12y ago
Minor nit, which is that all the top CS (and engineering, for that matter) schools are not Ivy League schools: MIT, Berkeley, Stanford, CMU. And I've never heard of top tech companies being referred to as Ivy League tech companies. But your point is still valid when you talk about "top schools."
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- famousactress 12y ago
  Ah, the irony of making sure we're careful to make subtle distinctions about the top fraction of a percent of the population... in response to a comment about massive class imbalance.
  - argonaut 12y ago
    Your words, not mine. My actual intention was to get the OP to move away from an emphasis on the "Ivy League" brand, which I think people need to stop putting up on a pedestal.

spacehome 12y ago

> Sexism in tech is real. Honest question: Is there any unambiguous evidence of this?

brianbreslin 12y ago

Would expanding the geographic sourcing of startups help with diversity? Cities like Miami, which is 75% hispanic, our startups are as diverse as our city. However I only recall a couple ever getting into YC (note, I have no idea of the merits of any others who applied). So could sourcing from more diverse cities help YC ?

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

tptacek 12y ago
The post title would be less offensive if you read the article more carefully, since it explicitly addresses ethnicity. And of course, calling foul when an article about diversity prioritizes gender issues is a way to trivialize gender issues. Was that your intent? Surely not, but the toxic subtext is there nonetheless.

argonaut 12y ago

One objection I have is with hackathons. From my observations most hackathons aren't particularly inclusive environments - they may do more harm than good. Examples include the intense focus on competition and prizes (I didn't think it was a good idea for YC Hacks to explicitly advertise the prize of getting an interview), the fact that many hackathons now have applications processes where more applicants are rejected than accepted (so that the net effect is more exclusion than inclusion), and the general vibe of having to power through the night with redbull while cranking out code. Most hackathons I've attended I've usually gotten this exclusive, rather than inclusive vibe. From my own experiences, the most exclusive hackathons have been the larger, more monied, more applied-to ones that have more applicants than attendees. The most inclusive hackathons have been smaller, intimate hackathons where the problem has been not having enough attendees! EDIT (reply to below): I'm referring to the general feeling of inclusion vs. exclusion (of newcomers, people not sure if they fit the mold of <quote>hardcore<unquote> coders, etc.). The next step is to argue that exclusion discourages minorities from pursuing the field.

tptacek 12y ago
Why is competition a diversity problem? To me, the idea that aggressive competition selects for a specific age, gender, or ethnicity is itself problematic. Not to mention that I think that's not true.
- benmathes 12y ago
  Broadly speaking, competition definitely creates sex-based selection-bias. Men self-select into competitions more than women, and are more motivated by them. http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/brain-wise/201210/when-competition-helps-and-hurts-motivation http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/brain-wise/201210/when-c... https://www3.nd.edu/~wevans1/fresh_honor_seminar/vesterland.pdf https://www3.nd.edu/~wevans1/fresh_honor_seminar/vesterland.... I am not saying men are more capable, just more likely to self-select into the competition. Read up on what professional coaches of womens vs mens teams say.
  - tptacek 12y ago

dothething 12y ago

The only age you see in any of these is percentage. Diversity shouldn't be a whatever convenient cause you want to look progressive on.

adamzerner 12y ago

1) I suspect that the bias against girls is "I don't think she'll be effective" rather than "I am sexist and don't want girls to succeed". 2) The bias doesn't seem to be that strong to me. This is a simplification, but I'd guess that girls start with about a 10% handicap. Meaning that in close cases, girls lose out. But in the cases of girls who clearly have ability, I don't see the bias against them as something that will prevent them from being successful. 3) A more important question is "what can we do about it?". I agree with the idea to showcase successful women. I think it'll help a little. But obviously it isn't anything close to a solution by itself. Option 1: If people were less biassed in the general sense, the bias against girls would be reduced. I think that making people less biased in the general sense is an important goal, but ultimately unlikely to happen for some time. Option 2: As there are more and more instances of girls having success, people will start to view girls as more competent, and the bias will be reduced. I think the fastest way to reduce the bias against girls is to increase the amount of successful girls. The question then becomes, "how do you do that?". This is getting long so I won't go into this too much... but I think it needs to be active rather than passive. Don't just sit there and wait for them to come to you asking for help. Go out there and inspire and persuade them.

tptacek 12y ago
The belief that African Americans were literally inferior to European Americans animated most of 20th century racism, so this observation is probably less helpful than your otherwise clear writing makes it sound. "Girls" is probably not the word you want to be using, by the way.
- adamzerner 12y ago
  > The belief that African Americans were literally inferior to European Americans animated most of 20th century racism, so this observation is probably less helpful than your otherwise clear writing makes it sound. I'm afraid I may have implied something I didn't mean to imply. I'm not sure what you mean by "this observation". I didn't mean to imply that people see girls as "literally inferior". Just that people probably think they're less likely to be competent. > "Girls" is probably not the word you want to be using, by the way. I'm saying girls to be all encompassing. "Women" just includes adults. And "females" sounds weird, like dehumanizing.

whybroke 12y ago

Its fantastic the gender issue is being looked at. And it's nice that non-US citizens are funded. But what percentage of the founders were pg's age or older?

alexanderss 12y ago
What percentage of applicants are his age or older? Probably very, very small for obvious reasons. Most founders PG's age and older have more financial resources (and network, etc) making YC's terms less appealing than for younger founders without any experience. In terms of diversity, age doesn't quite fit in here.
- whybroke 12y ago
  19% female applicants were accepted, and 24% applicants were female. 39% accepted applicants were from outside the US. 0% of founders were anywhere near pg's age. Are all Entrepreneurs under 40? Not remotely. But more astounding: You would never get tech industry leaders saying "men are just smarter" or "whites are just smarter" yet Zuckerberg makes exactly that statement for agism. And he made that statement at a Y Combinator Startup event. So re your "obvious reasons", it is not that every one over 40 is rich, it is that few intelligent people over say 40 would be fool enough to go near those organizations given that very public attitude.
  - tptacek 12y ago
    Pretty sure "0% of founders were anywhere near pg's age" is false.
    - whybroke 12y ago
      Is that really your only observation about the utterly extreme public positions I mentioned above? Very well. Name one.
      - tptacek 12y ago

a2kadet 12y ago

Any fans of the Office? http://youtu.be/FTOgm_EMgVI?t=12m8s http://youtu.be/FTOgm_EMgVI?t=12m8s These statements always seem really empty to me.

incision 12y ago

I appreciate that this post takes the time to acknowledge a few specific problems along with suggestions for actions. I haven't seen much of the former in diversity releases - just 'diversity' on its own as if the word alone represents both every possible problem and validates the proposed solutions. It's hard to put into few words, but as I think of it, diversity is neutral - it's just a measure and the goal shouldn't be dragging it one way or another just reducing friction. EDIT: To be clear, when I refer to friction I mean any barriers beyond individual control which prevent people, whoever, wherever from entering and/or excelling in the field.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

wudf 12y ago

Let me get this straight: YCombinator is pledging to snub investors who conduct sexist and racist abuses toward founders? I know we'll face adversity, and I want our team to be able to stand up for our beliefs without getting fucked by the tight-night nature of the community.

throwaway420 12y ago

> We’re encouraging our startups to get HR infrastructure in place earlier. If there's one thing that a fast and nimble startup DOES NOT NEED, it's HR drones trying to assert themselves into the startup. This is great news for us that compete with YC companies because it means that you're going to be handcuffing yourselves and bogging yourselves down employees who are literally a negative to the bottom line. > Specifically, we’d like the community to help by downvoting comments that make HN an unwelcoming place to anyone. In other words, you want to address diversity by stamping out any ideas that are contrary to the modern politically correct BS that most people here are dulled into believing.

lzecon 12y ago
HR for startups wouldn't and shouldn't be like HR for big companies. It doesn't have to slow a company down at all, and it's definitely a function that can enhance a company culture in really positive ways without dampening it. However, if you think sexual harassment doesn't happen in small startups, you're not paying attention. At the end of the day, HR is a mediator for the company to protect it from lawsuits. HR can stop a little issue from turning into a big, expensive issue, which is positive for both the company and employees.
mmodahl 12y ago
> In other words, you want to address diversity by stamping out any ideas that are contrary to the modern politically correct BS that most people here are dulled into believing. My natural reaction to this comment is Plonk. But I realize that is only perpetuating the problem. I have the luxury of ignoring you. I have the luxury of ignoring whoever I want to. Many people don't. And maybe that is exactly what you are trying to point out: if we try to solve this by using group consensus to ignore/block/killfile idiots/fools/bigots, what happens 1-on-1. So in response: I also have experienced situations where HR doesn't really add anything, but maybe someone can come up with a way to do HR. I don't think it is just politically correct BS.
melindajb 12y ago
What you fail to recognize is that YC is funding a disproportionately large number of founders who have little to no work experience. this leads to situations where the founders have no idea how to protect their company(including their investors) from harassment and discrimination lawsuits, or the attendant PR nightmare that hurts all their fellow batchmates. I happen to think this is not enough but at a minimum I've always found it rather surprising that the money invested in these companies didn't want to protect it from the stupidity that is inherent in most young people. To be clear, I mean this as stupidity of youth, ignorance, naivete. At bare minimum YC needs to require its founders to be trained in some basic legal 101 stuff since they haven't yet had to learn it on the job in a corporation. (and hey, If I'm going to make a wishlist, add some leadership training to this, too. If you want to make young people into CEOs you need to teach them how to do it. Building a great product is absolutely NOT synonymous with building a great company. If experience has no value to them in hiring, they're learning that somewhere, and it needs to be corrected by the investors--if not for the morality of responsibility to young people looking to them for guidance, but to vouchsafe their own investment.)

thrownaway999 12y ago

Could someone convince me why I should care about the gonads and skin color of the people writing code for me? Does anybody really think YC's performance would be better if their founder classes looked like a diversity picture from a college recruiting brochure?

designNERD 12y ago
You don't understand the importance of having different perspectives represented when you are making products and services for everyone? Seems pretty simple to me.
- crassus2 12y ago
  Could you point out for me where Sam talks about diversity of perspectives? All I see him talking about is what the OP mentions - gonads and skin color.
  - araneae 12y ago
    Gonads and skin color are correlated with a diversity of perspectives. All you have to do is look at the perspectives r/TwoX versus r/all, for instance, or Twitter vs. HN. For instance, just see the period panties thread. Men don't have the perspective necessary to even comprehend the idea of period panties, let alone build one. Not everything in tech is that obvious, of course. But it's worth thinking about non-obvious ways in which it might.
DanBC 12y ago
You avoid a lawsuit that destroys your company.

lacus 12y ago

YC is starting to take a lot of the right steps. I know for me personally, as a female founder, my attitude has changed a lot in the past 6-8 months (from "I guess I'll keep reading HN & essays because I don't want to miss out on interesting content... but I don't feel good about it, and I'd definitely never apply" -- to now being able to be an unequivocal fan, attending Startup School, etc.). Honestly, any effort at all is appreciated, although some efforts count for more than others. For instance, the Female Founders conference is fine, but I (and I think a lot of people) probably assign more credibility to efforts that really demonstrate a depth of thought on the issue. Here's a tiny example of what I mean, just from this essay, in fact: I always see VCs and journalists citing to the percent of portfolio companies that have a female founder, and every time I see this, it makes me think they're not really serious about analyzing the dimensions and complexity of the issue ("Out of how many founders TOTAL, not how many companies??"), so the fact that SA at least pointed this out puts this piece above not only other investor posts but also posts by tech journalists -- people whose very job it is to, you know, point this stuff out. That's a tiny example, but to me it counts for a lot more than just boilerplate "we support women blah blah blah." [1] The same principle probably applies for what kinds of events/projects you sponsor. "Women in tech" conferences are great and all, but the more innovative (and tangibly helpful) the initiative is, the better. I'm not sure what your suggestion/feedback mechanism for this is besides HN and talking to your own portfolio, but it may be worth setting up another channel to get ideas from current non-YC technical women/female founders (maybe anonymously, or at least in a more conducive forum than the HN comment section). Anyway, just my thoughts. I second the other comments about the importance of race/class diversity, too, but I don't have as much to add on that. (Not that race needed to be tackled in this particular post but the title maybe shouldn't have used the term "diversity" if it's mainly going to be about gender.) [1] It also affords YC/SA a bit more benefit of the doubt when the post also asserts some, uh, less-well-thought-through things, e.g., that other industries are doing worse than tech on gender issues. (Like who? Who's doing worse, specifically? I literally can't think of a single industry in 2014 America that's doing worse than the startup/tech community [both statistically and anecdotally, as well as based on my own personal experience]. Not even investment banking -- and certainly not medicine, law, academia, or traditional business. It's not helpful to sugarcoat it.)

12y ago

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

onmydesk 12y ago

I started watching 'Portlandia' for the first time a couple of weeks ago. Its basically the HN readership. Funny stuff. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8IfOKeZ-MWI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8IfOKeZ-MWI

alexyes 12y ago

Things will get better in the future, as CS education is becoming accessible to more people.

yypark 12y ago

First off, I applaud YC's efforts in this sphere to give all groups more opportunity to participate in startups and tech in general. I do not mean to disparage efforts or "derail" a conversation, but to bring up the fundamental question once the low-hanging fruit - discrimination, etc. is gone - self-selection and equality of result as a goal. Any diversity discussion will eventually reach the awkward points of over-represented minorities and self-selection, which negatively impact numerical diversity: There are some elements of the industry that will inherently self-select for groups. Asian males are currently the most over-represented group - racially due to US immigration policy and cultural factors encouraging many recent immigrants to go into technical fields and not humanities. Men tend to self-select into higher risk and highly competitive environments - e.g. startups, hackathons [1] but also ones with negative outcomes - crime, gambling addiction - see the 9-to-1 ratio of incarcerated men to women. (Denying the evidence for risk-taking and self-selection is to me, similar to denying evidence that sexism exists -- on the face of not wanting to confront it). At what point do these become issues to address? It seems like the desired result is not the strawman, Harrison Bergeron, 100% representative (of what? the US? the world?) demographic, so what is the desired outcome? I'm for eliminating discrimination and bias, but I don't think this will leave us with a 50-50 perfectly balanced startup scene, but it's the most fair. You would either have to change humans' own free-will preferences for risk, or the nature of the industry (with other side effects). If you have ideas on this, I'm open to hearing them. This is a legitimate question - shutting down discussion here in the name of being "against progress" or trivializing the issue is highly reminiscent of Paul Graham's warnings in "What You Can't Say [2]. The demographic balance of any industry or field is always in constant flux, and heavily influenced by self-selection and non-discriminatory factors. We need to remove discrimination, but also know that a fair outcome in the absence of discrimination - with equal opportunity does not necessarily lead to perfectly equal outcomes. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8087536 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8087536 "Broadly speaking, competition definitely creates sex-based selection-bias. Men self-select into competitions more than women, and are more motivated by them. http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/brain-wise/201210/when-competition-helps-and-hurts-motivation http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/brain-wise/201210/when-c... https://www3.nd.edu/~wevans1/fresh_honor_seminar/vesterland.pdf https://www3.nd.edu/~wevans1/fresh_honor_seminar/vesterland.... " [2] http://paulgraham.com/say.html http://paulgraham.com/say.html

tuxidomasx 12y ago

As mentioned in some other comments, the post focuses more on gender than ethnicity. As a 31 year old African American male in tech, some of the challenges for black males and females that I've witnessed range from cultural mismatches to being under-valued and therefore underutilized. There's also a lot of stress and pressure associated with often being the only black person in the room throughout most of your STEM education and career. For startups specifically, I've often heard of "pattern matching" as a manifestation of bias for white and asian males. If we're looking for a cause of the lack of ethnic diversity, we can't ignore the socially uninviting nature of the environment. Many of the solutions that have helped counter these challenges for me and a lot of my peers have been programs, organizations, and networks that focus on creating a culturally targeted atmosphere. Professional organizations like the National Society of Black Engineers really go a long way in encouraging minorities to pursue careers in technology. And within the startup community, I think programs like the NewMe accelerator meet a very specific and important need. Instead of just corralling minorities into tech companies or startups where they will still be underrepresented, there is a benefit in encouraging them to create their own companies where they can foster a cultural climate that naturally appeals to their ethnic peers.