This is the best comment here, and among the only ones relevant. This trial is about two parties. It isn't a proper representative in any way of any other part

This is the best comment here, and among the only ones relevant. This trial is about two parties. It isn't a proper representative in any way of any other parties or of any larger ideas or trends in tech. 12 people were tasked with carefully listening to all the evidence over a month, and not listening to the media summaries. They decided for KP. We have very reasonable basis to trust that they got it right, or that at least they did as well as we could given the same evidence. What does this say, if anything, about more general matters? Bayesian statistics might suggest that it decreases the belief in rampant sexism among VCs. But by how much, it's really impossible to tell. So we don't have much of a basis to change any general views on the industry based on this case. Just like it would have been had the verdict been the opposite (but again, Bayesian-wise it would have been some amount of support to the opposite position).