Earlier quoted context omitted.
because fail-forward works so great with implanted defibrillators, I presume? /s
“Move fast and kill people”
That's my main issue with SV-mentalities moving into the safety-critical space like autonomous driving
Hiring discrimination: a problem for men in female-dominated occupations
641–650 of 666 posts
Re: Hiring discrimination: a problem for men in female-dominated occupations
#642Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is obviously garbage statistics, isn't it? The conclusion they've drawn about the female distribution is based entirely on the performance of one female player. And they're obfuscating rank ordering with rating gap. Also, for an unexplained reason, they only consider Indian players. That's weird, isn't it? Why Indian? Let's investigate. Using the Oct 20th 2020 data, since the Oct 6th 2020 data isn't available on…
You seem passionate about proving something but I can't tell what it is.
Specifically here it's that the article you linked is total garbage, poorly reasoned, and that can be discerned without even checking the data.
And more generally Adrian's reply.
Re: Hiring discrimination: a problem for men in female-dominated occupations
#643Earlier quoted context omitted.
You seem passionate about proving something but I can't tell what it is.
> intelligence distribution skews more male at the higher end
Yep. In fact, something even narrower. That it would do so without any sexual dimorphism between men and women.
(And I'm not even here to have this argument -- it's just a basic fact behind one of the reasons why some tech companies would skew more male than others -- but then some people decided to argue.)
Re: Hiring discrimination: a problem for men in female-dominated occupations
#644Earlier quoted context omitted.
“Move fast and kill people”
That's my main issue with SV-mentalities moving into the safety-critical space like autonomous driving
I have mixed feelings. On the one hand you don’t want to kill people but on the other hand a lot of the big players in regulated industries are stagnant, complacent and inefficient. A good example would be SpaceX. Compared to their competitors they move faster, are innovative, cheaper and despite that they are reliable when it counts . Most of their failures were well calculated risks that helped them move faster. I am in health care and this industry also desperately needs new players that take more agile approaches and not the super expensive super slow approach most established players are taking. They are way too complacent.
Re: Hiring discrimination: a problem for men in female-dominated occupations
#645Earlier quoted context omitted.
It doesnt matter what label you put on it, its still age discrimination.
Yes but it means the OP is less likely to experience it.
Its interesting how you can make sweeping negative generalisations about one group in society (based on age) and its completely acceptable. But for any other attribute (skin color, gender, orientation, ethnicity) it is considered appallingly ignorant.
Re: Hiring discrimination: a problem for men in female-dominated occupations
#646Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm almost 50. I've been working in tech since 1996, and at this point, despite being a strong and seasoned engineer, I'm getting comments like, "it's different now", or "back in your day", etc, and the very young engineers fresh from school are the ones throwing this around. Those with a few years of experience under their belt don't. It's really disheartening, but it's also my job to train these bozos and turn them…
Recognizing seniority is hard. Computer Science is a field were a teenager in front of a computer quickly feels like a god. You can do anything! But getting that out of their thinking takes time. And that is IMHO what you experience. It is disheartening that they lack the respect they should have socially independent of profession for an "elder" person. I am in my early 40s as an architect arguing with our mixed-age…
>It is disheartening that they lack the respect they should have socially independent of profession for an "elder" person.
Especially when you consider the fact that the tools and concepts they've learned and made them super awesome were developed by people in their late 30s-50s. James Gosling was 40 when he came out with Java, Bjarne and Guido were both 35 when they came out with C++ and Python respectively. None of these guys, by the way, have stopped working.
Re: Hiring discrimination: a problem for men in female-dominated occupations
#647Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I don't really keep in touch with many coworkers due to time. My friends tend to come from outside of work and they're not software devs. 'friend' is a much higher bar than 'somebody in your network'. plenty of folks i worked with over the years, who i haven't heard from in decades, but i'd move them to the head of the line if they called up asking about work. i remember who got shit done and who didn't, and don't…
I think they were implying that their friends do not overlap with work, while your comment seems to allude to friends you've made from work.
please don't put words in my mouth. i said nothing about being friends with anyone. and you've fundamentally misinterpreted what i said.
you don't need to be friends with someone for them to be in your network.
Re: Hiring discrimination: a problem for men in female-dominated occupations
#648Earlier quoted context omitted.
Before everyone gets upset, this is a known fact and it's not a bad thing for women either. The skew only means the smartest 1% of men are smarter than the smartest 1% of women. On the other side of the curve the same is true. The dumbest men are dumber than the dumbest women. That means a larger percent of women occupy the IQ sweet spot.
> The skew only means the smartest 1% of men are smarter than the smartest 1% of women. I don't think you can put it like that. Even if the IQ (or similar "cognitive capacity" score) distribution is broader&shallower for males, it doesn't mean what you had said. Judith Polgar was #7th in chess rankings, even if overall number of players scored with ELO is counted in millions?
How could it not mean that?
Are you arguing with my 1% figure or the concept I was trying to relay?
The concept is correct IMO, the percentage is a guess.
Re: Hiring discrimination: a problem for men in female-dominated occupations
#649Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think they were implying that their friends do not overlap with work, while your comment seems to allude to friends you've made from work.
please don't put words in my mouth. i said nothing about being friends with anyone. and you've fundamentally misinterpreted what i said. you don't need to be friends with someone for them to be in your network.
My apologies. I agree you don't need to be friends to be in someone's network and that's all I was pointing out. I deliberately couched my statement in "I think" and "seems to" because I understand how easy it is to misinterpret in this format. Rewording someone's statement is a way to ensure one understands and allows the other person to correct it, it's not meant to "put words in your mouth." I'm not sure why your tone is so defensive, but thank you for clarifying.
Re: Hiring discrimination: a problem for men in female-dominated occupations
#650Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quoted post unavailable.
Most tech jobs don't actually require significantly greater than average intelligence. If you crunch the numbers it takes a pretty high bar to skew the gender of the posterior distribution much. It's not inconceivable and shouldn't be discarded out of hand, but there are plenty of other factors (including non-discrimination ones) worth keeping in mind. As an aside-- when you make the variance argument it's useful to…
I don't think it is useful here (on HN) to point out the low end. That just gets tedious and I think comes across as tedious. The pertinent fact is that m:f ratio increases at the top, and variance is just the most irrefutable factor that breaks apart any presumption that the distributions should be identical.
Also, I'm not trying to pretend that's the only difference between men and women. Men sleep 20 minutes less than women. Is that "inherent superiority"? No, but it's an advantage. Or maybe men undersleep and it's a disadvantage.