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

2,445 IBM Employees Openly Condemned IBM for Enabling Racist Regimes

techrights.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 84 posts

Re: 2,445 IBM Employees Openly Condemned IBM for Enabling Racist Regimes

#31

Post by supergeek133 »

TeaDrunk wrote: post #12
supergeek133 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that's the whole issue. Policy versus practice. I'm usually hard pressed to find people who disagree with the thought of "we should try to hire people other than white men in a white men dominated profession". The issue comes when the unspoken (OP's "off the record") enforcement of this is willful hate towards those people.

Of course there is an issue when people miss the point and do stupid shit. That doesn’t mean we should stop trying to improve representation in one of if not the most fast growing, wealth-providing career fields. I’m utterly baffled by this argument that a case of one company missing the point means IBM shouldn’t even try.

IBM should try, everyone should try.

But on the same side people just can't believe that the middle management and/or line level people responsible for some of these decisions are being malicious.

Re: 2,445 IBM Employees Openly Condemned IBM for Enabling Racist Regimes

#32

Post by supergeek133 »

AlexTWithBeard wrote: post #19
supergeek133 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that's the whole issue. Policy versus practice. I'm usually hard pressed to find people who disagree with the thought of "we should try to hire people other than white men in a white men dominated profession". The issue comes when the unspoken (OP's "off the record") enforcement of this is willful hate towards those people.

How about "we should try to hire more asian men in black women dominated fields"?

Honest question I could probably google or something, but what are some "black women dominated fields"?

Re: 2,445 IBM Employees Openly Condemned IBM for Enabling Racist Regimes

#33

Post by Wolfenstein98k »

TeaDrunk wrote: post #6
CincinnatiMan wrote: post #3

> (2) Expand our diversity recruitment programs specifically targeting women, people of color, and LGBT people with the goal of doubling recruitment of these groups in 2017 and steadily increasing the share of these groups as a proportion of new hiring in subsequent years. Initiatives like this worry me that we'll end up like my previous employer where we were off-the-record instructed not to hire a white male for ou…

Yes, “don’t hire white men” is a much different policy than “please increase your funnel and hire more non white cis hereto men”. I would argue your previous employer more or less just misses the point of these things.

Those things are identical in practice.

The request is to hire non-whites and/or non-men.

The clearest way to enforce it is just to specify exactly that - it achieves the stated aims with no cognitive dissonance.

Re: 2,445 IBM Employees Openly Condemned IBM for Enabling Racist Regimes

#34

Post by Wolfenstein98k »

bluedevil2k wrote: post #21
humanrebar wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree that the existing diversity in tech is best described as "white". Tech has a lot of diversity. It's that some groups, especially women, are still underrepresented.

18% of computer science majors in the US are women. 20% of the computer science jobs are held by women. How is that underrepresenting women? * - https://www.computerscience.org/resources/women-in-computer-...

These people believe that men and women are identical (except for socialisation), and so any less than 51% representation is under-representation and evidence of sexism.

Re: 2,445 IBM Employees Openly Condemned IBM for Enabling Racist Regimes

#35

Post by rangoon626 »

robert_foss wrote: post #26
raxxorrax wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is actually structural racism in contrast to attesting it on society or some specific people. Honestly, I think this letter is quite weak. To see Trump as a racist is a result of medial smear campaigns. He might have a foul mouth, but I have different definition of what constitutes a racist. You can have countless reasons to dislike Trump, but he is no racist. Maybe the signers of this letters are.

Just out of curiosity, what constitutes racism to you? Trump called White Supremacists 'fine people'. He has clearly played to the racists parts of his base on numerous occasions. If actions promoting racism isn't racism, then I don't know what is.

He also achieved the highest black unemployment rating under his administration. That does not seem like something a racist would do. This is why no one is buying this narrative.

Re: 2,445 IBM Employees Openly Condemned IBM for Enabling Racist Regimes

#36

Post by supergeek133 »

humanrebar wrote: post #13
supergeek133 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that's the whole issue. Policy versus practice. I'm usually hard pressed to find people who disagree with the thought of "we should try to hire people other than white men in a white men dominated profession". The issue comes when the unspoken (OP's "off the record") enforcement of this is willful hate towards those people.

I disagree that the existing diversity in tech is best described as "white". Tech has a lot of diversity. It's that some groups, especially women, are still underrepresented.

Pick whatever gender and/or race you like. That's just the most commonly used example.

My point is just as in there have been and are people that are willfully malicious and ONLY hire white men/women, it seems we have a hard time accepting there will be some willfully malicious enforcement of a policy such as "we need to make an effort to hire more outside of a gender or race group".

Re: 2,445 IBM Employees Openly Condemned IBM for Enabling Racist Regimes

#37

Post by tasogare »

robert_foss wrote: post #26
raxxorrax wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is actually structural racism in contrast to attesting it on society or some specific people. Honestly, I think this letter is quite weak. To see Trump as a racist is a result of medial smear campaigns. He might have a foul mouth, but I have different definition of what constitutes a racist. You can have countless reasons to dislike Trump, but he is no racist. Maybe the signers of this letters are.

Just out of curiosity, what constitutes racism to you? Trump called White Supremacists 'fine people'. He has clearly played to the racists parts of his base on numerous occasions. If actions promoting racism isn't racism, then I don't know what is.

Judging someone simply on his race. Simple example: refusing a job to someone because of this criterion. It doesn’t matter if Asian, Black, White or other, if the candidate is dismissed because of race, it’s racism.

Re: 2,445 IBM Employees Openly Condemned IBM for Enabling Racist Regimes

#38

Post by asutekku »

Wolfenstein98k wrote: post #34
bluedevil2k wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

18% of computer science majors in the US are women. 20% of the computer science jobs are held by women. How is that underrepresenting women? * - https://www.computerscience.org/resources/women-in-computer-...

These people believe that men and women are identical (except for socialisation), and so any less than 51% representation is under-representation and evidence of sexism.

There's zero reason why in computer science and tech women and men should have so drastically different ratios. Even back in the day programming was seen as a women's job.

Re: 2,445 IBM Employees Openly Condemned IBM for Enabling Racist Regimes

#39

Post by Wolfenstein98k »

robert_foss wrote: post #26
raxxorrax wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is actually structural racism in contrast to attesting it on society or some specific people. Honestly, I think this letter is quite weak. To see Trump as a racist is a result of medial smear campaigns. He might have a foul mouth, but I have different definition of what constitutes a racist. You can have countless reasons to dislike Trump, but he is no racist. Maybe the signers of this letters are.

Just out of curiosity, what constitutes racism to you? Trump called White Supremacists 'fine people'. He has clearly played to the racists parts of his base on numerous occasions. If actions promoting racism isn't racism, then I don't know what is.

That is pure fake news. You may not be intending to lie, but you're spreading them.

"To remove all doubt, the President continued with “I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists, because they should be condemned totally – but you had many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists, okay?”"

https://www.scottadamssays.com/2019/04/30/the-fine-people-ho...

Re: 2,445 IBM Employees Openly Condemned IBM for Enabling Racist Regimes

#40

Post by raxxorrax »

robert_foss wrote: post #26
raxxorrax wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is actually structural racism in contrast to attesting it on society or some specific people. Honestly, I think this letter is quite weak. To see Trump as a racist is a result of medial smear campaigns. He might have a foul mouth, but I have different definition of what constitutes a racist. You can have countless reasons to dislike Trump, but he is no racist. Maybe the signers of this letters are.

Just out of curiosity, what constitutes racism to you? Trump called White Supremacists 'fine people'. He has clearly played to the racists parts of his base on numerous occasions. If actions promoting racism isn't racism, then I don't know what is.

No he probabaly did not or these people weren't white supremacists. Racism to me is attributing characteristics to different races/ethnicities and value judgements of theae attributes. People like that exist, but they are a tiny minority.
Post reply on HN