Born for it – How the image of software developers came about • Hacker News Board

Re: Born for it – How the image of software developers came about

#51

Post by cb18 » Thu, Apr 21, 2016, 6:52 AM UTC

jonathankoren wrote: post #30

cb18 wrote: post #19

So many mysteries of the modern world become quite understandable when you allow yourself the luxury of understanding the relevance of intelligence. It varies among races, knowledge of this is scientifically sound, it is the consensus of everyone who studies it seriously. The modern tendency is to feverishly avert one's eyes from this fact, but it must be reckoned with eventually. I believe we'll all be better off wh…

> [Intelligence] varies among races, knowledge of this is scientifically sound, it is the consensus of everyone who studies it seriously. Holy fuck. Yeah. I'm calling you out for being a racist fuck. Your "human biodiversity" aka "scientific racism" is a pseudoscience that has no basis at all. All your ideas better explained by economics. So in conclusion, fuck you.

What's more likely, there are people posing as scientists trying legitimize 'racism,' or scientists presenting accurate data are called 'racists' because people don't like their data?

Re: Born for it – How the image of software developers came about

#52

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Apr 21, 2016, 6:55 AM UTC

cb18 wrote: post #47

kenjackson wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I figured that this is where it came from. These are generally fringe researchers, led by the author herself, Gottfredson. As was commonly noted at the time... few who signed it were measurement experts. Note the lack of prestigious programs of the signatories. This is the Wall Street Journal fringe. Certainly not the mainstream of top researchers in the field.

Your trying hard, but you seem to have no idea what you are talking about. " This is the Wall Street Journal fringe. " It ran in the journal Intelligence signed by their editorial board. Who are these "non-fringe" you speak of? People who tell you what you want to believe? HuffPo bloggers? Or are you just blowing hot air, totally ignorant of this field in general, and decided to call some people you've never heard of…

[deleted]

Re: Born for it – How the image of software developers came about

#53

Post by anu_gupta » Thu, Apr 21, 2016, 6:58 AM UTC

jonathankoren wrote: post #30

cb18 wrote: post #19

So many mysteries of the modern world become quite understandable when you allow yourself the luxury of understanding the relevance of intelligence. It varies among races, knowledge of this is scientifically sound, it is the consensus of everyone who studies it seriously. The modern tendency is to feverishly avert one's eyes from this fact, but it must be reckoned with eventually. I believe we'll all be better off wh…

> [Intelligence] varies among races, knowledge of this is scientifically sound, it is the consensus of everyone who studies it seriously. Holy fuck. Yeah. I'm calling you out for being a racist fuck. Your "human biodiversity" aka "scientific racism" is a pseudoscience that has no basis at all. All your ideas better explained by economics. So in conclusion, fuck you.

The problem is that it's hard to argue with racist trolls. Pretty much anything you do plays into their need for attention and an audience.

Still, i upvoted you, and hopefully you won't get banned.

Re: Born for it – How the image of software developers came about

#54

Post by eaq » Thu, Apr 21, 2016, 7:16 AM UTC

exclusiv wrote: post #29

I don't deny that there is some history in the current representation of programmers but I don't buy that socially awkward white males are somehow oppressing diversity in general as some would suggest. When they supposedly aren't, it's a brogrammer problem and blatant sexism. Everyone wants to find someone to blame. Granted this was 9 years ago, but when I was in computer engineering we had a few classes with only 1…

> All the nerdy types flocked to her

Is it unimaginable that this might be uncomfortable?

Re: Born for it – How the image of software developers came about

#55

Post by bitwize » Thu, Apr 21, 2016, 7:19 AM UTC

CardenB wrote: post #8

Joof wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure that there is an undertone that it's their fault. At best, it's because Asians value school and mathematics more and Google prefers high GPA and ability to solve mathematical and algorithmic problems. I suspect there are also a lot of Asians in the world and Google will pull talent from other countries. To continue your analogy: "I'm not Asian, so I'm not good at math, but perhaps if I were Asian I could…

Google doesn't really select for high GPA.

Naw, they just select for advanced degrees from God-tier schools, something those C students just happen not to be able to reach for.

Re: Born for it – How the image of software developers came about

#56

Post by onion2k » Thu, Apr 21, 2016, 7:26 AM UTC

exclusiv wrote: post #29

I don't deny that there is some history in the current representation of programmers but I don't buy that socially awkward white males are somehow oppressing diversity in general as some would suggest. When they supposedly aren't, it's a brogrammer problem and blatant sexism. Everyone wants to find someone to blame. Granted this was 9 years ago, but when I was in computer engineering we had a few classes with only 1…

All the nerdy types flocked to her and were very inclusive with team projects.

That woman would have had to question why the nerdy types were so keen to include her. There's a huge difference between a motive of "Let's invite someone to our team because they're a great engineer" and "Let's invite someone to our team because they're hot and they might agree to date me once they really know me".

Being keen to include someone is great if it's for the right reasons.

Re: Born for it – How the image of software developers came about

#57

Post by cronjobber » Thu, Apr 21, 2016, 7:39 AM UTC

eaq wrote: post #54

exclusiv wrote: post #29

I don't deny that there is some history in the current representation of programmers but I don't buy that socially awkward white males are somehow oppressing diversity in general as some would suggest. When they supposedly aren't, it's a brogrammer problem and blatant sexism. Everyone wants to find someone to blame. Granted this was 9 years ago, but when I was in computer engineering we had a few classes with only 1…

> All the nerdy types flocked to her Is it unimaginable that this might be uncomfortable?

Yes, we clearly need to tell nerds they can't interact with females, because...

...help me out here. Because nerds are icky?

Re: Born for it – How the image of software developers came about

#58

Post by jacalata » Thu, Apr 21, 2016, 7:44 AM UTC

mikekchar wrote: post #10

Reading articles like this is so strange for me because I have such a hard time understanding the perspective. To give some background, I started in the late 80's and early 90's in Canada. There were very few womon in my CS program (I recall it was 5 our of 140 in the graduating class), but even still in my early career, I was never on a team without women. I would say that between 10-20% of the programmers I worked…

So what percentage of male programmers that you worked with were excellent?

Re: Born for it – How the image of software developers came about

#59

Post by mdpye » Thu, Apr 21, 2016, 7:44 AM UTC

cronjobber wrote: post #57

eaq wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> All the nerdy types flocked to her Is it unimaginable that this might be uncomfortable?

Yes, we clearly need to tell nerds they can't interact with females, because... ...help me out here. Because nerds are icky?

Because it's still a way of being singled out, even if well intentioned.

Do you think they flocked for the lone woman's benefit?

Re: Born for it – How the image of software developers came about

#60

Post by Terr_ » Thu, Apr 21, 2016, 7:51 AM UTC

cronjobber wrote: post #57

eaq wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> All the nerdy types flocked to her Is it unimaginable that this might be uncomfortable?

Yes, we clearly need to tell nerds they can't interact with females, because... ...help me out here. Because nerds are icky?

Perhaps the label "creepy", which some argue is disproportionately reliant on the attractiveness of the subject rather than what they say or do.