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

What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

cspicenter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 972 posts

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#241

Post by bergenty »

noasaservice wrote: post #181
epicureanideal wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t appreciate the casual racism in your post.

What's "funny" about your comment is that there is no "white" race. "Whiteness" was created in a Virginia 1691 law to be "not negroe and not indian". Naturally, that also expanded to be not: Jews, Asians, sometimes not Italians, usually not Irish, and absolutely no indigenous people of any sort. Defining yourself by what peoples you exclude is the core kernel of racism. And that's what "white" means.

There’s no race either. Asian is not a race and neither is white but I’m using the current designation society uses.

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#242

Post by jimbob45 »

weakfish wrote: post #205
jimbob45 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

Gross generalizations don’t really help prove a point

Here are four examples from this very thread. Reddit is currently saying the same, though the identical verbiage is entirely coincidental.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33166633

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33166674

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33166773

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33167483

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#243

Post by qwytw »

outworlder wrote: post #30

> Imagine you work under a black executive at Microsoft. Does a graph like this one make you more or less likely to think they got to where they are because of their accomplishments? And then they show a graph where only 5.6% of the execs are black (up from 3.7%). It's a pitiful number. Yes, it's still more likely they got there because of their accomplishments, bigot. > From 2021 to 2022, I worked as a manager in Mi…

Well only 4.5% of all people in Washington are black. If we go by country wide population white people white people are not really over presented in MS leadership, Asians are though, as much as blacks are underrepresented.

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#244

Post by badpun »

peter422 wrote: post #231
badpun wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really, it's basically circular. The selection of who does and who doesn't belong to a "diverse" category is based on how frequent these people happen to be in the population (for example, Asians men are not "diverse", because there's plenty of them in tech - but Asian women are, because they're far less frequent). So, by definition, the "diverse" candidates will always be a minority. It can't be fixed. Even if w…

My CS classes in college were literally 98% male and 98% white and Asian. You are talking about a slippery slope to distract from the obvious existing problem. There might be a slippery slope in the future, I agree, but that doesn't mean there isn't an active problem now!

Why is that a problem exactly? What problem is that causing to society? Mind you, there's plenty of women in tech (and often in business or managerial positions, directing those white and asian programmers), they just don't go through the CS degree. I personally don't blame them, my CS degree at least was really super boring and mostly just a way to get an easy and well paying job. And men care about both money and technical things much more than women, so it's natural than they flock to CS.

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#245

Post by tptacek »

Manuel_D wrote: post #222
comex wrote: post #132

> You might imagine this policy doesn’t bias the hiring process, since managers are still free to choose who to hire after interviewing the diverse candidates. But because of the number of applicants, most are rejected based on their resumes. Imagine diversity candidates are 1% of the applicants but 15% of those interviewed. This gives those candidates opportunities to do well in interviews that their peers with simi…

> So minority candidates are given an advantage in getting their foot in the door, but still have to prove themselves qualified for the job by doing well in interviews. Discrimination in selecting who to interview is absolutely a form of discrimination. Imagine I tell my recruiters to exclusively interview white Catholics, and I respond "well, those white Catholics still had to pass the skill-based interview. Had we…

None of this engages with the comment it replies to. One way to see that is to simply remove the quoted sentence, and read the comment to see if it would remain coherent at the top of the thread.

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#246

Post by tablespoon »

omegaworks wrote: post #215
tablespoon wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Over 50 years ago the US Military recognized that segregation and entrenched racial biases lead to inefficiencies and lack of readiness.[1] In an economy where hiring pipelines for skilled technical people are stretched incredibly thin, we need to be taking a hard look at why we're only getting people that look a certain way through our hiring process. That doesn't follow, at all. For one, you're comparing apples a…

The norm in Silicon Valley is treat D&I with an inordinate level of skepticism, if not reject it outright as "anti-meritocratic." What we have here is not explicit racial segregation, but a system operating via capital and clout that has elevated a small group of mostly white men into positions of extreme power and influence over the most vibrant segment of the American economy. This creates huge bind spots and carri…

>> D&I may very well be operating at the wrong end of the pipe.

> Then that should be the argument at hand. Not rejecting the idea outright.

That doesn't follow. If D&I is operating at the wrong end of the pipe, it should be rejected outright because it won't work and will cause pointless problems in the meantime.

> That there is no system in place for addressing concrete performance issues in any employee is the failing of the organization.... If this is not the case at the organization she worked at, she was bound to burn out, irrespective of the DEI objectives.

There was a system in place, but if you couldn't read between the lines: the bar was far higher for firing a "diverse" employee with performance issues, which followed from the DEI ethos in place.

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#247

Post by peter422 »

BlargMcLarg wrote: post #232
peter422 wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So even if we have aggregate statistics showing how certain groups of people are disadvantaged, the fact that the rules do not apply universally means we should just ignore them?

You can flip the script and ask why you should apply rules based on the aggregate despite obvious counterexamples. White boonies kid isn't happy to be excluded over the fact they are white, either. Point being this whole strive for 'ultimate equality' is going to create victims in its fanatical wake. No perfect method exists and no one wants to be on the losing end. But it is easier for those in a position of affluen…

So we throw up our hands and perpetuate the obviously unjust status quo?

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#248

Post by thegrimmest »

shinjitsu wrote: post #223
thegrimmest wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're writing with the implicit assumption that private companies ought to be meritocratic above all. I don't think that's the case. I think private people and orgs ought to be free to choose whom they associate with, hire, and promote based on any criteria they can come up with. Nepotism? No problem. Height/weight/age/beauty/culture/hair colour discrimination? You bet. Then these orgs all compete and the most effic…

Most of these (Kosher Butcher for example) are going to be very small companies and these kinds of requirements don't usually kick in till you have a certain minimum level of employees since there is an assumption in most states that very small businesses will mostly hire (extended) family.

So why can't small teams in large orgs also hire extended family? Given we've established a benign proclivity amongst people to do so.

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#249

Post by postsantum »

hintymad wrote: post #117

Maybe the question is why the leftists are so influential that for-profit companies are willing to comply with their ideology. Isn't the best way to increase the representation of minorities is to increase the funnel? Better schools, better teachers, more rigorous curriculum for all instead of for the elite students, a whole new culture that values curiosity and geekiness in general, and eventually a larger number of…

No post body was provided.

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#250

Post by sblom »

CincinnatiMan wrote: post #88

I don’t work at Microsoft, but another large corporation, and have been told by my manager that right now it is difficult for a white male to get promoted and that we may need to do some strange maneuvers to make it happen if I’m interested in a promo. Was kind of taken aback by the bluntness.

I _do_ work at Microsoft, and judging by the recent crop of promotions (early September) there was still plenty of opportunity for white males (and everyone else).
Post reply on HN