4 ms·

Striving for 50% creates high demand in the labor market for female CS workers, which incentivizes colleges to strive for the same 50/50 ratio (many now do, see

by yzzxy 12y ago

Striving for 50% creates high demand in the labor market for female CS workers, which incentivizes colleges to strive for the same 50/50 ratio (many now do, see CMU) to fill all-important hiring and starting salary metrics. It also encourages young women to consider CS as a career. Over time, this could fix the gender imbalance issue in tech.

questions 12y ago
Doesn't it screw over the current males who are applying for jobs and loosing out on positions because I female is preferred over them?
- yzzxy 12y ago
  In my opinion, that debate isn't really worth having in this context - see the HN rules on reopening flamewars[0]. Suffice to say that affirmative action has already been discussed inside and out in almost every single context. The US Supreme Court case University of California v. Bakke is a good starting point if you want to read about the issue. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - questions 12y ago
    Well, then feel free not to participate in this debate. I understand where the courts stand on affirmative action, that case is a little different than what I am talking about. Also, just because a the Supreme Court decides something doesn't mean they are correct (Dred Scoot v. Standford).
    - yzzxy 12y ago
      It's a little different, but still a good starting point. It contains some strong arguments both for and against affirmative action, and is significant beyond simple legal status. I cited that case not because I believe SCOTUS is correct in all contexts, but because the format of Supreme Court cases is a good way to have an argument in my opinion. Facts are presented from previous hearings, without deliberations over authenticity, and legal arguments are made based on those facts. I note that I don't think the debate is worth having here because it is against the HN guidelines: > Please avoid introducing classic flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say about them. not because I don't think the discussion is still worth having in the present day. Finally, I would like to point out that Dredd Scott v. Sandford is often considered an accurate legal ruling. The direct result of the ruling was disgusting, but side remarks by justices in the majority opinion revealed fundamental inconstancies in US state/federal slavery laws and precipitated the Civil War.
- MrDom 12y ago
  In theory, yes. In practice, no, because most of those female computer scientists won't be looking for jobs writing code. They'll be looking for project management roles. So while female applicants may bump qualified male applicants, the number is so small as to make very little difference.

by yzzxy 12y ago

questions 12y ago

Doesn't it screw over the current males who are applying for jobs and loosing out on positions because I female is preferred over them?

yzzxy 12y ago
In my opinion, that debate isn't really worth having in this context - see the HN rules on reopening flamewars[0]. Suffice to say that affirmative action has already been discussed inside and out in almost every single context. The US Supreme Court case University of California v. Bakke is a good starting point if you want to read about the issue. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- questions 12y ago
  Well, then feel free not to participate in this debate. I understand where the courts stand on affirmative action, that case is a little different than what I am talking about. Also, just because a the Supreme Court decides something doesn't mean they are correct (Dred Scoot v. Standford).
  - yzzxy 12y ago
    It's a little different, but still a good starting point. It contains some strong arguments both for and against affirmative action, and is significant beyond simple legal status. I cited that case not because I believe SCOTUS is correct in all contexts, but because the format of Supreme Court cases is a good way to have an argument in my opinion. Facts are presented from previous hearings, without deliberations over authenticity, and legal arguments are made based on those facts. I note that I don't think the debate is worth having here because it is against the HN guidelines: > Please avoid introducing classic flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say about them. not because I don't think the discussion is still worth having in the present day. Finally, I would like to point out that Dredd Scott v. Sandford is often considered an accurate legal ruling. The direct result of the ruling was disgusting, but side remarks by justices in the majority opinion revealed fundamental inconstancies in US state/federal slavery laws and precipitated the Civil War.
MrDom 12y ago
In theory, yes. In practice, no, because most of those female computer scientists won't be looking for jobs writing code. They'll be looking for project management roles. So while female applicants may bump qualified male applicants, the number is so small as to make very little difference.