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

Meritocracies Are Unfair – and That's the Point

outlookzen.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–126 of 126 posts

Re: Meritocracies Are Unfair – and That's the Point

#121

Post by jelliclesfarm »

sanxiyn wrote: post #60
cs702 wrote: post #31

Many people, including me, feel differently about two different kinds of unfairness: * We are OK with the unfairness that stems from "winning the genetic lottery," which confers an unfair advantage regardless of the socioeconomic background of parents . Most of us want a society in which the most able, talented, hard-working, persistent among us can put those qualities to work for their most productive uses. * We are…

I am not okay with unfairness stemming from genetic lottery. Sure, I agree those with genetic lottery should be able to put those qualities to most productive uses, it would be waste otherwise. On the other hand, they probably shouldn't capture the most of produced value, since it is mostly unearned. There is a reason lottery earning is heavily taxed.

are you suggesting that the 'genetic lottery' should be heavily taxed and those who are born from positive eugenics(arranged marriages also come to mind. and soon in the future..what i like to call 'gattaca babies') should be penalised?

doesnt child rearing by responsible parenting have no role in your universe?

Re: Meritocracies Are Unfair – and That's the Point

#122

Post by jelliclesfarm »

username90 wrote: post #72
sanxiyn wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not okay with unfairness stemming from genetic lottery. Sure, I agree those with genetic lottery should be able to put those qualities to most productive uses, it would be waste otherwise. On the other hand, they probably shouldn't capture the most of produced value, since it is mostly unearned. There is a reason lottery earning is heavily taxed.

Money is a measure of power in society, it lets you choose how society spends some of its resources. Giving more power to competent people so they can direct societies efforts to better use is a good thing, that is why capitalism works. If you take that away we are left with communism. Note I don't say that we should let people be poor etc. I am from Sweden, I think Sweden works great in this regard. Sweden has produ…

do you think sweden has diversity? sweden was mostly homogenous until they started taking in refugees that increased it's diversity. and leading to more conflicts than earlier. this is how i see it from the outside as a non-swede.

Re: Meritocracies Are Unfair – and That's the Point

#123

Post by jelliclesfarm »

jariel wrote: post #100
crististm wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi there! If you pay attention to the ratio of pro vs against meritocracy rants in this page you will find some interesting (anec)data. Make your own conclusions!

We don't need 'anecdotes' we have tons of data. Higher IQ, better academic results correlates with better jobs. That's a very crude, but broad measure of meritocracy. But it's even easier than that: show me people earning $180K developing software who are 'complete idiots'. They don't exist. People who earn more are generally smarter, more conscientious, credentialed. It's basically a ridiculous argument to imply tha…

i think you made a better case for meritocracy than the article itself.

the point you made earlier of people who dont ever have visibility of the 'other' always sees only from their pov particularly resonated. it is human nature to find joy with what we have. the projection of the privileged class about what the 'other' lacks is more damaging than any other inequality.

it's like someone who is happy with their prius until they saw that they neighbour got a tesla. suddenly, they feel impoverished.

now..what do you call the person who walks around the neighbourhood and keeps telling the prius guy that its unfair that the neighbour who is human just like him has a tesla..and why not him!

we have more people walking around neighbourhoods spouting opinions sowing seeds of discontent these days. but at the end of the day, the prius guy and tesla guy should ignore the shit stirrer and go on with their lives..driving their own cars to get to their desired destinations.

Re: Meritocracies Are Unfair – and That's the Point

#124

Post by sershe »

umvi wrote: post #91
px43 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the single mom working 2 jobs and didn't graduate high school herself This isn't a quick fix strategy, it's a long term fix strategy that takes generations. The "access to education" is exactly for the benefit of people like the mother. Also the UBI means that she no longer has to work two jobs to pay for basic services for her kids. UBI is the ultimate safety net that catches almost everyone who the current system…

Maybe, but I'm not convinced. People don't just magically bootstrap themselves into incremental self-improvement just because their immediate needs are being met. My next door neighbors here in Maryland are impoverished african americans receiving SNAP and HOC from the state (basically free rent and food), and the kids are consistently truant and on track to drop out of middle school. There needs to be an element of…

So what is your take on that? I am genuinely interested, because coming from a country where everybody started with more or less the same crappy housing, cheap transit, no-frills healthcare, and ok education (and where 95% of my classmates were the same ethnicity, and the other 5% were, if anything, more successful and richer), I've come to look at such people with extreme disdain. Growing up I was actually on the poorer end of my peers, and I was merely pro-meritocracy, by my mid-20ies I was (and still am) outright classist.

So, in the US, I buy the arguments about the people who have a precarious housing situation, etc.; but I would absolutely "leave behind" the people you describe, with free rent and food. What else can one do?

Re: Meritocracies Are Unfair – and That's the Point

#125

Post by sershe »

cs702 wrote: post #31

Many people, including me, feel differently about two different kinds of unfairness: * We are OK with the unfairness that stems from "winning the genetic lottery," which confers an unfair advantage regardless of the socioeconomic background of parents . Most of us want a society in which the most able, talented, hard-working, persistent among us can put those qualities to work for their most productive uses. * We are…

The unfair advantages compound, though. Kids with stable upper-middle-class parents would probably be better at things than poor kids, just because they have more resources and time, less stress, better role models. That is why equity advocates don't like standardized tests anymore...

Are you ok with unfairness that stems from higher ability that is itself the result of "winning the socioeconomic lottery"?

Like, I was born in Russia, so my theoretical CS knowledge outside of what I learned on my own is crap, because (unlike e.g. maths) the CS curriculum in my ~2nd tier college was completely useless. I am talented enough to work in a big tech co, and my maths is (or rather used to be) top-notch, so it didn't have to be like that, it's purely based on where I could go to college. If you were hiring a computer scientist straight out of college, would you hire me or a MIT grad? He merely won the socioeconomic lottery.

Re: Meritocracies Are Unfair – and That's the Point

#126

Post by sershe »

spacekitcat wrote: post #80
username90 wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People who think that white men will hire more minorities and women if they focused less on merit are naive.

Striving to build an environment where effort is made to attribute credit where it's due and to strive for equality of outcome for all is what we need to do. You're still picking the 'best person for the job' according to your own biases for what constitutes the 'best' (because how else could it work?), but you're also making an effort to ensure that your team/department/company isn't just all white (straight etc) me…

So you are basically describing a malfunctioning meritocracy, where the function that determines merit is corrupted by biases. Seems like the solution would be to remove biases (e.g. in case of coding interviews, do blind interviews instead of/in addition to in-person ones).

As a side note, my experience in all the teams I worked at (tech in SFBA and Seattle) is that white men are a small minority, and if you exclude Eastern Europeans barely exist at all. Even if you exclude the usual suspects, I'm pretty sure I've had more coworkers originally from North Africa than originally from North America :)

Post reply on HN