4 ms·

Serious question, what is this representative of? Random internet comments? Unscientific internet polls? I honestly can't figure out a reason why any of this

Serious question, what is this representative of? Random internet comments? Unscientific internet polls? I honestly can't figure out a reason why any of this is any more relevant or scientific than a youtube comments argument about why some band does or does not suck monkey chode.

verroq 12y ago
Clearly, people are not allowed to question the coding ability of a female because it's sexism.
- DanBC 12y ago
  Obviously it is sexism if you doubt the coding ability of a female because she's female. HN fucking sucks for these topics.
  - verroq 12y ago
    No one is doubting her ability because she's female. But you should be allowed to doubt their ability no matter their gender is.
    - mcv 12y ago
      How can you say nobody is doubting her ability because she is female? RTFA! Yes, of course you can doubt people's ability regardless of their gender, but it doesn't happen regardless of gender, it happens because of gender. People start out thinking: "Woman. Probably not a good coder. Ah, see? She knows about job interviews! She's a recruiter! Not a programmer at all." Had it been a man, they'd be: "Hey, this programmer knows a lot about job interviews!"
      - deleted 12y ago
        [deleted]
        MrScruff 12y ago
        I'm not sure I understand your argument. Are you suggesting that because there are more male programmers in total and hence more male programmers that are 'above average', that a randomly selected male candidate is statistically more likely to be 'above average' than a randomly selected female candidate? If so that would be incorrect.
        deleted 12y ago
        [deleted]
        lutusp 12y ago
        > There are more males above average then females who are above average. You have dropped the qualifier "programmers", also if you hadn't done that, you aren't adjusting for population sizes, therefore you have left the realm of rational discourse. As to males versus females, adjusted for population size, they're equal (and this is a statistic, not a popular PC pronouncement). As to male programmers versus female programmers, without specific data but knowing that women are better at calculation, we can safely conclude that their population-adjusted abilities are either equal or contradict your implied thesis. The supreme irony of this conversation is that, if you were any good at calculation, you would see the systematic error in your claims. There's a large element of self-reference here.
        6nne 12y ago
        You have this a bit wrong. If ability is normally distributed for a given sex (and the mean of the ability of the same), then it is true that there would be more above-average male programmers than female programmers - just as there are more male programmers than female programmers at any skill level. If you are provided a skilled programmer, they are most likely male. And if you are provided any programmer, they are most likely male. However, If you pick a random male programmer and a random female programmer, the woman is just as likely to be a good coder as the man. This means that if you are talking to an anonymous person online and they are a good coder, you should assume they are male (if you're going to assume anything). This does not work backwards - if you are talking to a female programmer and you do not know their coding ability, it would not be particularly likely that they are a poor coder.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]

verroq 12y ago

Clearly, people are not allowed to question the coding ability of a female because it's sexism.

DanBC 12y ago
Obviously it is sexism if you doubt the coding ability of a female because she's female. HN fucking sucks for these topics.
- verroq 12y ago
  No one is doubting her ability because she's female. But you should be allowed to doubt their ability no matter their gender is.
  - mcv 12y ago
    How can you say nobody is doubting her ability because she is female? RTFA! Yes, of course you can doubt people's ability regardless of their gender, but it doesn't happen regardless of gender, it happens because of gender. People start out thinking: "Woman. Probably not a good coder. Ah, see? She knows about job interviews! She's a recruiter! Not a programmer at all." Had it been a man, they'd be: "Hey, this programmer knows a lot about job interviews!"
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
      - MrScruff 12y ago
        I'm not sure I understand your argument. Are you suggesting that because there are more male programmers in total and hence more male programmers that are 'above average', that a randomly selected male candidate is statistically more likely to be 'above average' than a randomly selected female candidate? If so that would be incorrect.
        deleted 12y ago
        [deleted]
        lutusp 12y ago
        > There are more males above average then females who are above average. You have dropped the qualifier "programmers", also if you hadn't done that, you aren't adjusting for population sizes, therefore you have left the realm of rational discourse. As to males versus females, adjusted for population size, they're equal (and this is a statistic, not a popular PC pronouncement). As to male programmers versus female programmers, without specific data but knowing that women are better at calculation, we can safely conclude that their population-adjusted abilities are either equal or contradict your implied thesis. The supreme irony of this conversation is that, if you were any good at calculation, you would see the systematic error in your claims. There's a large element of self-reference here.
      - 6nne 12y ago
        You have this a bit wrong. If ability is normally distributed for a given sex (and the mean of the ability of the same), then it is true that there would be more above-average male programmers than female programmers - just as there are more male programmers than female programmers at any skill level. If you are provided a skilled programmer, they are most likely male. And if you are provided any programmer, they are most likely male. However, If you pick a random male programmer and a random female programmer, the woman is just as likely to be a good coder as the man. This means that if you are talking to an anonymous person online and they are a good coder, you should assume they are male (if you're going to assume anything). This does not work backwards - if you are talking to a female programmer and you do not know their coding ability, it would not be particularly likely that they are a poor coder.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]