New evidence that British workplaces are losing viewpoint diversity • Hacker News Board

Re: New evidence that British workplaces are losing viewpoint diversity

#631

Post by lucasverra » Thu, Apr 29, 2021, 5:16 PM UTC

beaconstudios wrote: post #578

lucasverra wrote: post #573

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Social media did a lot to foster outrage and destroy nuanced thinking. Plug as a founder: We are trying to balance things out on Polemix.co (invite code LV005) Launched 6 weeks ago, we bring together people from both sides of hot questions. The format is inspired from TikTok and consists of 30-second videos in which speakers answer YES or NO to controversial questions. The app’s goal is to break echo chambers. If y…

How does only allowing yes or no answers increase nuance?

Because everyone gets to see a Yes followed than a No video. Also, besides the classical "like button", there is a Respect button that signals that you are willing to open the door to the other side. Hence, the nuancing and approaching instead of flame wars

Re: New evidence that British workplaces are losing viewpoint diversity

#632

Post by rovolo » Thu, Apr 29, 2021, 5:19 PM UTC

giantg2 wrote: post #605

rovolo wrote: post #592

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question is why those careers earn less money. Your assertion is that the careers men choose are more dangerous, so those careers earn more. My question is, are dangerous careers well paid? Here are the totals for occupational deaths: https://www.bls.gov/news.release/cfoi.t03.htm ~25% for Transportation and material moving occupations ~20% for Construction ~10% for Installation, maintenance, and repair occupation…

I believe all the ones you listed would fall above the median salary of about $50k.

My point wasn't that all the specified careers were above the median salary, my point was that the most dangerous jobs don't seem to be the best paid jobs. The original question was

> But then why do those careers earn less money?

and the follow up was

> If, by being a man, you are 10x more likely to die from your job, and you are 10x more likely to die younger, should society compensate for your fewer hours lived?

which I tried to answer with looking at which jobs killed more people. It doesn't look to me like the big money is in jobs which kill more people

https://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/ceseeb3a.htm

-----

Transportation: $25.71/hr ~= $51k/yr

Construction: $32.24/hr ~= $64k/yr

Repair and Maintenance: $25.26/hr ~= $51k/yr

------

Professional and Business: $35.82/hr ~= $71k/yr

Financial: $39.67/hr ~= $79k/yr

Computer systems design and related services: $50.60/hr ~= $101k/yr

Legal services: $46.34/hr ~= $93k/yr

-------

That said, I think the commenter I was responding to was trying to change the subject

> If no, why would society decide to undervalue males?

Regardless of the answer to their question, the topic would then be on-the-job deaths instead of the gender wage gap. I chose to answer the part of the question relevant to the gender wage gap.

Re: New evidence that British workplaces are losing viewpoint diversity

#633

Post by giantg2 » Thu, Apr 29, 2021, 5:28 PM UTC

rovolo wrote: post #611

giantg2 wrote: post #594

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not that agree or disagree, but... Using that logic, why should we care at all. Less than 7 million out of about 170 million in the workforce. Shouldn't we be looking a other, more common jobs? (On a side note I'm surprised software devs are only 1.9 million)

There are two orders of magnitude difference between the number locomotive operators and the CEO & engineering jobs: 55k/7m = 0.8% 7m/170m = 4% There's a legit difference between arguing about a $40k line item on a $1m house sale and a $400 line item.

What's your point? Either way we're adding up largely arbitrary line items composing a very small minority. It makes more sense to look the areas that would impact the most people. To use your analogy, who cares if the seller takes care of that $40k line item of the other ones that need work add up to $250k? Great, I have a solid roof but what about my crumbling foundation...

Re: New evidence that British workplaces are losing viewpoint diversity

#634

Post by stickfigure » Thu, Apr 29, 2021, 5:28 PM UTC

stickfigure wrote: post #621

rovolo wrote: post #588

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are: 55k "Locomotive engineers and operators" (90% male) 1.7m "Chief executives" (70% male) 1.9m "Software developers" (80% male) 3.2m "Architecture and engineering occupations" (85% male) Maybe there is a lot of handwringing within the locomotive industry, but it really doesn't seem important enough for the rest of us to care about.

Sure. And there are fewer full-blown autistic people than there are people "on the spectrum". But it's a lot easier to study autism by looking at severe cases than it is to try to figure out what's biologically different about people who are "a little aspy". 92% of veterinarians are female 98.8% (!) of preschool and kindergarten teachers are female If you want to understand gender imbalance in employment, these are t…

One more to add, with enough population for you to care about:

"Driver/sales workers and truck drivers": 3.4m, 92.2% male.

Re: New evidence that British workplaces are losing viewpoint diversity

#635

Post by AnimalMuppet » Thu, Apr 29, 2021, 5:32 PM UTC

slibhb wrote: post #568

wpietri wrote: post #13

Funny that they don't mention what "certain, commonplace views" people "stay silent" about. That might put a different spin on things. As I mentioned [1] about the Basecamp debacle, you can't get full "viewpoint diversity" and full "identity diversity" because some viewpoints are hostile to some identities. Given our society's long history of those viewpoints being endemic, and given the slow movement away from ident…

In your tweet, you immediately go to "well off white guys". The fact that you feel comfortable and proud to write like this in public, under your real name, perfectly encapsulates how far off the reservation you are.

And you, in reply, use "off the reservation"? I'm not sure you're in a position to cast the first stone...

Re: New evidence that British workplaces are losing viewpoint diversity

#636

Post by curryst » Thu, Apr 29, 2021, 5:34 PM UTC

crummy wrote: post #150

phroobster wrote: post #96

I am so tired of constantly hearing about politics at my workplace. Politics have already made their way into the tv shows, music, video games, and online forums that I enjoy. At least let me disconnect from that outrage-fuel at work. It also affects team cohesion. I can easily collaborate with just about anyone when I don’t know their political beliefs. As soon as I find out someone holds opposing views on a topic I…

Were your TV shows, video games, etc really lacking in politics before? Or was it just a different kind of politics? (Honest question.)

It was less blatant. As another poster mentioned, the politics was part of the narrative. The GamerGate debacle was a big shifting point, where video games have become another cultural battlefield. I'm not picking on one side or the other, I just want to enjoy my video games in peace without people calling each other SJWs or racists or sexists.

Just as an example, there was a huge kerfuffle in Battlefield a few years ago because they added black and female playable characters. They proceeded to shove it in everyone's face so we could be in awe of how progressive they are, and then the counterparty threw a huge fit about how those people would not have been combatants in WWI. I don't particularly care either way about the change, because it doesn't impact my gameplay. I do care that for a while the entire community focused in on this one aspect that has almost nothing to do with the game itself. It makes me dislike both sides, because they're both getting in the way of the game.

Re: New evidence that British workplaces are losing viewpoint diversity

#637

Post by jb775 » Thu, Apr 29, 2021, 5:35 PM UTC

samvher wrote: post #209

jb775 wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> how willingly other people bring up politically sensitive issues in the workplace I'd say I'm a mix of conservative/Libertarian and this kind of blows my mind over the past few years. It seems like I constantly hear people on the left openly voicing their political opinions around crowds of people, and always speak in a way that they genuinely believe everyone around them agrees....and often have a condescending wa…

It sounds like you're saying "I only see these leftists using extremely shallow reasoning, and they don't understand that they're wrong because they don't look at my/our reasoning beyond a shallow level." If you would look for more depth in the reasoning of the people you're disagreeing with yourself, you might be surprised at what you might find. The frustration you're expressing to me seems to be very symmetric, oc…

I believe I understand their reasoning significantly better than they understand mine. I don't think it's even close to being symmetric. As I said, the left's policies are shallower and easier to understand...when you question as to how a certain policy would ever actually work, the left usually tries to change the subject and call me a bigot insurrectionist (as the leftist crowd behind them cheers "yeah shutup you insurrectionist!"). All without ever discussing the initial question of how something would actually work. Look at AOC's green new deal BS and question-dodging as a perfect example. Then how she relies on sensationalist fluff (shallow-topic) banter as protection....without ever answering any of the initial questions. And then she honestly believes she's a savior sent from above. To me, the levels of tunnel-vision dissolution and lack of grade-school logic is astonishing.

This all leads me to the question if this is all being stirred up on purpose (via the media) as a type of psychological warfare against America. The emotions being purposely poked by the media (race issues, gun rights, etc) don't seem to be purely a ratings grab. But the insane thing about this situation is that the left is so caught up in shallow issues that they label me as a "conspiracy theorist"...I feel like I'm trying to warn the people on the roof of the skyscraper in Independence Day right before it gets blown up by the aliens.

Re: New evidence that British workplaces are losing viewpoint diversity

#638

Post by giantg2 » Thu, Apr 29, 2021, 5:36 PM UTC

Loughla wrote: post #513

Const-me wrote: post #498

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and can be controlled by unfair external factors Are you sure about that? In Sweden, society is very gender-equal: they have paternity leave, very small paygap, about 50% of women in leadership position. Yet only 13% of Swedish engineers are women. I think if you eliminate all the external factors you’re talking about, you still won’t get anywhere close to 50% of female engineers, or 50% of male pediatricians, as l…

>you still won’t get anywhere close to 50% of female engineers, or 50% of male pediatricians, as long as people are free to choose a profession. And that's fair. My argument isn't that it needs to be split and completely equal. It's that the freedom to choose needs to be equal, and the playing field needs to be level, so that who is and who isn't in 'field a' is, in fact based on merit and not arbitrary classificatio…

"It's that the freedom to choose needs to be equal, and the playing field needs to be level, so that who is and who isn't in 'field a' is, in fact based on merit and not arbitrary classification at birth such as gender and ethnicity."

This seems to imply that it is not equal now. Is there any basis to support that?

Re: New evidence that British workplaces are losing viewpoint diversity

#639

Post by sixstringtheory » Thu, Apr 29, 2021, 5:41 PM UTC

baobabKoodaa wrote: post #502

cycomanic wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No the commenter picked racism as an example, because they think viewpoint diversity is not necessarily good. Big difference to your statement.

I'd say that's a rather charitable interpretation. "Not necessarily good"? Come on, this is the comment we are talking about: > I don't trust this article. The phrase "Losing viewpoint diversity" is of course crafted to make it sound like a chilling trend. Pretty clear what they want you to think about it. But if you drill into what that's referring to, whether you think it's a bad thing is entirely up to what you th…

> that's a rather charitable interpretation

Welcome to HN, this is how we do things here:

> Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith.

From the guidelines (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html).

I’ll also note that anytime I see the phrase “come on” in debate I perceived that the person that said it has lost, knows they lost (usually subconsciously) and are literally begging for leeway.

Re: New evidence that British workplaces are losing viewpoint diversity

#640

Post by wpietri » Thu, Apr 29, 2021, 5:43 PM UTC

brippalcharrid wrote: post #53

wpietri wrote: post #13

Funny that they don't mention what "certain, commonplace views" people "stay silent" about. That might put a different spin on things. As I mentioned [1] about the Basecamp debacle, you can't get full "viewpoint diversity" and full "identity diversity" because some viewpoints are hostile to some identities. Given our society's long history of those viewpoints being endemic, and given the slow movement away from ident…

> Funny that they don't mention what "certain, commonplace views" people "stay silent" about. That might put a different spin on things. The article actually mentions at least two examples, so I don't think there's as much room for spin with this as you might think. One is Conservative voters, who have been vilified by the hard left since the 1970s, not least because of a sense of betrayal with the erosion of parts o…

"Conservative" isn't a view. It's a movement allegiance. So I don't think that qualifies. I feel the same applies more loosely to Brexit.

What's interesting in both case is that both movements absolutely contain rich seams of racism. So if the actual view people are afraid to voice is racism either intent or action, then I would submit that it is in fact good that they are not voicing it.

I also strongly doubt that many are afraid to voice a view that the correct tax rate for high income earners are 3 points higher or lower. But what decades of history teaches is that since overt racism is no longer acceptable, quite a lot of other issues are used as covers for racism. See Lee Atwater's quote here, for example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy#Evolution_(1...

So I stand by my view that we must look at the specific opinions people are scared to voice and see to what extent they relate to oppressing groups who were previously forced to keep quiet. My bet here is that a lot of what "Conservative voters" happen to be afraid to speak about is the conservation parts of the past that they are rightly ashamed to be honest about wanting to keep.