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

Study shows class bias in hiring based on few seconds of speech

news.yale.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 265 posts

Re: Study shows class bias in hiring based on few seconds of speech

#251

Post by dragonwriter »

sokoloff wrote: post #242
dragonwriter wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can only be so much better at nursing than the average qualified nurse I...disagree rather strongly that this, to the extent it is true, differentiates SWE from nursing. Comparing workers with identical responsibilities, the same is true in SWE, in both cases there are large impact multiples possible within the field, but they come from roles with greater responsibility; in nursing, because different roles requ…

Whatever the entry-level credential is, SWEs as a set will have a spread of productivity/capability that’s wider than the entry-level nurse. Whatever the highest-level credential is, SWEs will have a spread that’s wider than the highest-level nursing credential (and likely wider than the ratio in the entry-level SWE range as well).

> Whatever the entry-level credential is, SWEs as a set will have a spread of productivity/capability that’s wider than the entry-level nurse.

I see, and you have presented, no reason whatsoever to believe that this is true.

Re: Study shows class bias in hiring based on few seconds of speech

#252

Post by [deleted] »

ingleswood wrote: post #246
kodah wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A redneck is usually a white, working class person of meager means. This is how I've known the term growing up. What the commenter I originally replied to was doing was using the term to refer to white people, any white person. When I pointed out that a good portion of the people in the article are from San Diego (I followed a doxxing thread on Reddit during this, nearly all of these people were business owners or pe…

I mean I agree with you that it was wrong to use the word 'rednecks' to refer to people protesting at the Capitol. However this doesn't seem at all to be an example of what the other poster claimed, of people who loudly object to racial slurs and yet 'mock rednecks and Wal-mart shoppers'?

[deleted]

Re: Study shows class bias in hiring based on few seconds of speech

#253

Post by kodah »

ingleswood wrote: post #246
kodah wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A redneck is usually a white, working class person of meager means. This is how I've known the term growing up. What the commenter I originally replied to was doing was using the term to refer to white people, any white person. When I pointed out that a good portion of the people in the article are from San Diego (I followed a doxxing thread on Reddit during this, nearly all of these people were business owners or pe…

I mean I agree with you that it was wrong to use the word 'rednecks' to refer to people protesting at the Capitol. However this doesn't seem at all to be an example of what the other poster claimed, of people who loudly object to racial slurs and yet 'mock rednecks and Wal-mart shoppers'?

SJW and "woke" are nebulous terms with grass-roots participation. Personally, I don't know how you can establish patterns of grass-roots groups without extensive research and observation, which does not happen today. It seems like a fruitless conversation to have because any time you accuse any grass-roots group of something people will say things like:

- that's not a group

- they're not affiliated with x

- anyone can join

- no true Scotsman

- not enough data

Plausible deniability is built-in. That's why I only responded to the bit about frequency, because someone saying it never happens is quite surprising, someone implying it's a norm is equally surprising, at least to me.

Re: Study shows class bias in hiring based on few seconds of speech

#254

Post by newacct583 »

kodah wrote: post #253
ingleswood wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean I agree with you that it was wrong to use the word 'rednecks' to refer to people protesting at the Capitol. However this doesn't seem at all to be an example of what the other poster claimed, of people who loudly object to racial slurs and yet 'mock rednecks and Wal-mart shoppers'?

SJW and "woke" are nebulous terms with grass-roots participation. Personally, I don't know how you can establish patterns of grass-roots groups without extensive research and observation, which does not happen today. It seems like a fruitless conversation to have because any time you accuse any grass-roots group of something people will say things like: - that's not a group - they're not affiliated with x - anyone ca…

But... YOU were the one who implied it was a norm, by insisting that it happens "a lot" that the same people who make fun of rednecks then jump on people or other perceived racial bias. And I didn't, and still don't, think that's true at all. And nothing you've shown here seems like evidence to me, you're just lumping all your "enemies" in one bucket and figuring that they're the same folks.

Re: Study shows class bias in hiring based on few seconds of speech

#255

Post by _dps »

dragonwriter wrote: post #251
sokoloff wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whatever the entry-level credential is, SWEs as a set will have a spread of productivity/capability that’s wider than the entry-level nurse. Whatever the highest-level credential is, SWEs will have a spread that’s wider than the highest-level nursing credential (and likely wider than the ratio in the entry-level SWE range as well).

> Whatever the entry-level credential is, SWEs as a set will have a spread of productivity/capability that’s wider than the entry-level nurse. I see, and you have presented, no reason whatsoever to believe that this is true.

In the right position, excellent SWEs have enormous leverage. A median SWE might maintain some line-of-business app for an insurance company, and an excellent one might create software that is used by an entire industry (say, Redis just as an example).

By comparison, given the physical and time constraints of the job, an excellent nurse might be able to spread their expertise to 2x as many patients as a median? 3x? I think even 3x is a stretch. Maybe they can make a life-saving catch in the hardest 5% of cases (definitionally, very rare opportunity to apply this level of skill)?

Re: Study shows class bias in hiring based on few seconds of speech

#256

Post by kodah »

newacct583 wrote: post #254
kodah wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SJW and "woke" are nebulous terms with grass-roots participation. Personally, I don't know how you can establish patterns of grass-roots groups without extensive research and observation, which does not happen today. It seems like a fruitless conversation to have because any time you accuse any grass-roots group of something people will say things like: - that's not a group - they're not affiliated with x - anyone ca…

But... YOU were the one who implied it was a norm, by insisting that it happens "a lot" that the same people who make fun of rednecks then jump on people or other perceived racial bias. And I didn't, and still don't, think that's true at all. And nothing you've shown here seems like evidence to me, you're just lumping all your "enemies" in one bucket and figuring that they're the same folks.

> But... YOU were the one who implied it was a norm, by insisting that it happens "a lot" that the same people who make fun of rednecks then jump on people or other perceived racial bias. And I didn't, and still don't, think that's true at all. And nothing you've shown here seems like evidence to me, you're just lumping all your "enemies" in one bucket and figuring that they're the same folks.

I am not the same person you were replying to here, FYI: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26961742

I am guessing you are mixing me and the person you were originally replying to up. If you'd bothered to read my response I said that I find statements regarding "never" and "norm" around this equally surprising. The thread I linked you to has me correcting two posters use of the term. I never asserted it was a norm.

Furthermore, in another of these replies I very clearly stated that I don't think allegations against SJW or "woke" people are worth chasing because nobody is really out collecting data and studying their behavior, both online and in person.

Re: Study shows class bias in hiring based on few seconds of speech

#257

Post by sokoloff »

dragonwriter wrote: post #251
sokoloff wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whatever the entry-level credential is, SWEs as a set will have a spread of productivity/capability that’s wider than the entry-level nurse. Whatever the highest-level credential is, SWEs will have a spread that’s wider than the highest-level nursing credential (and likely wider than the ratio in the entry-level SWE range as well).

> Whatever the entry-level credential is, SWEs as a set will have a spread of productivity/capability that’s wider than the entry-level nurse. I see, and you have presented, no reason whatsoever to believe that this is true.

Who is the Jon Carmack of nursing? How many more patients did they treat in a shift than the median nurse?

(Jon would have started with entry-level credentials at some point.) Substitute with Dennis Ritchie, Linus Torvalds, Bjarne S, Peter Norvig, James Gosling, Brenden Eich, rtm, rms, or whomever your idea of someone obviously on the right tail of the distribution is.

I'm sure there are famous and outstandingly accomplished nurses, just as there as there are for SWEs. My claim is that there are likely more of the latter and more continuous distribution of them.

Re: Study shows class bias in hiring based on few seconds of speech

#258

Post by x1ph0z »

flavius29663 wrote: post #69
anigbrowl wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure you can. You're less likely to be pulled over in most of the US than a black person driving the same car and wearing the same clothes.

I was stopped too by police and one time briefly searched, so what? Being stopped by the police is not a game changer. If you haven't done anything wrong you'll walk away and go to work and back home. Why is being stopped by police such a big deal? I think the police should do more of that in the US, it would reduce crime considerably.

I mean the past year hasn't shown you that being stopped while being black is could end up being a dangerous situation?

Re: Study shows class bias in hiring based on few seconds of speech

#259

Post by renewiltord »

dragonwriter wrote: post #251
sokoloff wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whatever the entry-level credential is, SWEs as a set will have a spread of productivity/capability that’s wider than the entry-level nurse. Whatever the highest-level credential is, SWEs will have a spread that’s wider than the highest-level nursing credential (and likely wider than the ratio in the entry-level SWE range as well).

> Whatever the entry-level credential is, SWEs as a set will have a spread of productivity/capability that’s wider than the entry-level nurse. I see, and you have presented, no reason whatsoever to believe that this is true.

Knowledge workers have a scale effect that others don't. Software stuff has a scale effect.

This is why a top PI or scientist can literally save hundreds of millions (as Norman Borlaug did) but the best surgeon can save mere thousands in their life at best using surgery¹. There is a scale effect.

Likewise, SWEs can write code that can apply to all people.

Same with the top public policy people, for instance. It's the length of the lever and where the fulcrum is placed.

No nurse has that lever.

¹ I hate having to handle the edge-casers, but scientists can come up with new surgical procedures (as Werner Forssmann did) and that is way for them to use a long lever.

Re: Study shows class bias in hiring based on few seconds of speech

#260

Post by KMag »

ingleswood wrote: post #244
KMag wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but we usually group these sorts of disagreements as axiomatic disagreements, not bias. Maybe I'm grossly naive, but I doubt that percentage wise there are many hiring managers who hold racial superiority as axiomatic. My understanding is that hiring bias usually boils down to assumptions about aggregate intelligence, trustworthiness, and/or work ethic of groups of people. If someone thinks Swedes just aren't t…

This is far too simplistic. There are well studied phenomena by which people apply bias along the following lines (an arbitrary example chosen): 1. I believe a stereotype that Swedish people are more friendly than Scottish people. 2. I know this person is Swedish, so I will tend to judge their behavior as generally friendly when I would interpret the same behavior by a Scottish person as less friendly. 3. I tend to a…

1. That's very interesting. Thanks for enlightening me.

2. I think the case of the background checks is, however, one of the simple cases. It looks like some managers have an irrational belief that they're interviewing people likely to have criminal convictions, but change their minds when background checks come back clean. Hopefully as more and more background checks come back clean, managers adjust their biases.

On a side note, there is something to be said for giving convicted criminals a second chance. I'm not sure if people with a single criminal conviction are that much more likely than someone with a clean record to commit a crime that harms their employer.

Post reply on HN