Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

martinfowler.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 130 posts

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

#91

Post by mpweiher »

sgift wrote: post #84

The idea that some people are born for some things is very prevailent. Usually, it is called "talent" and nobody cries foul. As a completely tech-unrelated example: Art schools usually ask you for a portfolio when you apply to show that you are "talented" in art, which would be as if I needed a certificate as a doctor to study medicine. Sometimes these things seem to be accepted, sometimes not. Weird.

And the opposing viewpoint, the "blank slate" hypothesis is completely untenable. Steven Pinker wrote a big book on it, and even if you just read the introduction and maybe the first chapter it will become obvious how ridiculous the idea is...and it doesn't get any "better" for the BSH afterwards.

See also: "Anyone who thinks psychological sex diffs are wholly learned has lot of explaining to do" https://www.psychologytoday.com/sites/default/files/attachme...

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

#92

Post by DKnoll »

jonathankoren wrote: post #72
DKnoll wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know if I should be disturbed or amused that you were willing to say "And if we're going to have a good ol' oppression-off how about blacks?" under your real name. It says a great deal about your motives when you speak facetiously about the struggle of others as if it's just a trump card to be used in debate. I could digress into a rant about academics here but I'll hold my tongue and let you use your imagina…

My point was that it sucks for all oppressed groups, but trying to say, "yeah but this other group has it worse," or even, "but why isn't this other group mentioned" isn't helpful to any group. It's like showing up at an event to fight cancer, and complaining that and heart disease isn't getting its due. Yes, heart disease is important too, but that's not why we're here.

What I questioned is why the author misrepresented who actually developed the ENIAC through vague wording and omission. You can be wrong on the details and still ultimately be right.

I wasn't trying to start a 'who has it worse' pissing contest, I was pointing out that making a broad generalisation about all white men is discriminatory and unfair... a bit ironic for an article discussing discrimination against women. There are people in all ethnicities, sexes, sexual orientations and classes that have faced adversity, you can't use someone's demographic to determine how much. Turing probably looked like your average socially awkward, white, male programmer up until he was chemically castrated and killed himself.

Using the term 'socially awkward' seems more like a schoolyard taunt than an unbiased description of a demographic... especially when similarly alienating treatment is what caused many to want an escape and persue computers in the first place. The shallow see awkwardness, but others recognise it as the detachment and eccentricity that often accompanies intellect.

Showing up to an event to fight cancer will have null effect unless you're doing research or dropping off a cheque anyway, so what's the harm in bringing up heart disease while you're there?

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

#93

Post by douche »

halomru wrote: post #85
eva1984 wrote: post #70

First of all..The stereotype is mainly nerdy, socially-awkward male...but is it overall white? No. Actually the percentage of white people in software is lower than the overall demographics. I can understand why white is singled out here, because it helps to drive the rhetoric of the discussion to racism and sexism, but fundamentally the problem is much more complex. My 2 cents about why women are underrepresented in…

>Gamers are overwhelmingly MALE. This used to be true for decades, but by now the majority of people who play computer games are female. Social games and mobile games were a game changer in this regard. It will be interesting to see how that affects interest in programming in the future.

Yeah, but people aren't tweaking the autoexec.bat files and frigging around with virtual memory settings, tweaking drivers and dealing with crazy work-arounds for their social smartphone games, the way a lot of us did cutting our teeth on PC games.

I picked up a tremendous amount of various computer trivia digging around making games work, and basically internalized a lot of debugging techniques before getting out of short-pants, so to speak.

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

#94

Post by blah5432 »

icebraining wrote: post #87
mpweiher wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, that is exactly the claim. For example, the book "The Computer Boys Take Over" quoted all over in TFA claims that the drive to "professionalize" programming and make it more "engineering like" was specifically to drive women out, after men found out the profession was gaining status and money in the late 70ies and early 80ies. Which is ridiculous on so many fronts, I am not sure whether to laugh or cry. And…

Oh, fair enough, I understood a different thesis from the article (of a self-reinforcing stereotype among employers).

This is a blame game. It's tried on individuals. When they reject accusations, there's the "you are biased even if you don't realize" and then the "you are a tool in the hands of an oppressing society". If you can't convince, at least seed the doubt.

Have you seen what happens when there are no employers? Open source projects, I mean. It's qualified then as a "toxic culture" with "ambient pressure", "terrified women" and so on.

There is a handful of nonsense viruses that survive and flourish in the interwebs, concepts that are instantly rejected as absurd but have enough followers to keep then alive for years. Either you detect them early or you will be pushed by peer pressure (until the fad goes away).

Unfortunately the clear feeling that something is totally wrong and backwards (like EU defending Samsumg right to push its crap instead of Google apps) fades very quickly to propaganda.

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

#95

Post by fsloth »

probably_wrong wrote: post #79

Yes, I am a nerd. Yes, I am socially awkward, and I did start programming around 10. And here is yet another article pointing out that all the fun I'm having in my career now is something that should make me feel ashamed or guilty. "People like you are the reason why women won't program! Why can't you go to a bar like everyone else?" I know it's my own bias, but no one was writing articles for me when I was "sticking…

"And here is yet another article pointing out that all the fun I'm having in my career now is something that should make me feel ashamed or guilty"

The article does not state anything like that. Unless you have kids and are actively stopping your daughter from using a computer.

'But describing the abundance of nerds in the field as "what can we do about it?", as if that was a problem? Give me a break.'

If there is a societal bias from stopping people trying things they might be actually good at based on their sex organs I see that as a problem.

It's not about categorizing being a nerd as 'good' or 'bad'. It's being aware and negating filters based on obsolete stereotypes.

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

#96

Post by blah5432 »

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?

Is it unimaginable that this might be uncomfortable?

Is is unimaginable that this might not? Maybe because it was made respectfully and in a friendly manner? Could the fact that the person telling it didn't mention any rejection mean that this was the case? Why are we talking in questions all the time?

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

#97

Post by pessimizer »

eva1984 wrote: post #70

First of all..The stereotype is mainly nerdy, socially-awkward male...but is it overall white? No. Actually the percentage of white people in software is lower than the overall demographics. I can understand why white is singled out here, because it helps to drive the rhetoric of the discussion to racism and sexism, but fundamentally the problem is much more complex. My 2 cents about why women are underrepresented in…

> My 2 cents about why women are underrepresented in software industry is that not too many of them are interested in the beginning.

Women were once the majority of programmers.

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/computer-programmin...

edit: my 65 year old mother is the only reason why I'm a programmer today. Well, that and William Gibson.

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

#98

Post by rimantas »

douche wrote: post #93
halomru wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Gamers are overwhelmingly MALE. This used to be true for decades, but by now the majority of people who play computer games are female. Social games and mobile games were a game changer in this regard. It will be interesting to see how that affects interest in programming in the future.

Yeah, but people aren't tweaking the autoexec.bat files and frigging around with virtual memory settings, tweaking drivers and dealing with crazy work-arounds for their social smartphone games, the way a lot of us did cutting our teeth on PC games. I picked up a tremendous amount of various computer trivia digging around making games work, and basically internalized a lot of debugging techniques before getting out of…

So maybe it is reversed: the fact that you don't need to tweak autoexec.bat any more draws more females to the gaming?

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

#99

Post by fsloth »

eva1984 wrote: post #70

First of all..The stereotype is mainly nerdy, socially-awkward male...but is it overall white? No. Actually the percentage of white people in software is lower than the overall demographics. I can understand why white is singled out here, because it helps to drive the rhetoric of the discussion to racism and sexism, but fundamentally the problem is much more complex. My 2 cents about why women are underrepresented in…

"My 2 cents about why women are underrepresented in software industry is that not too many of them are interested in the beginning.

One big drive of male programmers, according to my observation (hundreds of samples), are video games, myself included."

I think you are drawing a false statistical conclusion here.

The basic hypothesis you are making is: "In the population of women, there is a lower average aptitude for programming than in the population of males". "This hypothesis is based on sampling my coworkers, and the general population".

Let's take as given that the statistical aptitude for programming in the general population is much lower than in the population of professional software engineers. Basically, if all of the women you've met and are using as a basis for your hypothesis are not your co-workers, then you are sampling from completely different sets.

If we presume you are familiar with n women (and they are picked randomly from the general population) then yes, it is very likely that they have a lower aptitude for programming than the set of your male colleagues. But this lower aptitude would apply to any random set picked from the general population irrespective of sex, or any other factor.

" it is the early stage education system to introduce programming to wider range of people"

Yes, this.

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

#100

Post by rimantas »

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.

Would you make the same comment if someonone claimed that physical ability differs among races? E.g. kenyan runners, sherpas, etc. If no, what makes you absolutely sure that intelectual abilities have zero relation to the race?
Post reply on HN