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

When She Codes, The Revolution’s Coming

torontostandard.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 148 posts

Re: When She Codes, The Revolution’s Coming

#121

Post by vectorpush »

Cushman wrote: post #108
yummyfajitas wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is about gender. Men don't want to work with women because they are afraid that the women won't be able to reason logically. They're afraid she might hide her insecurity behind politics and power trips, and she will be unable to be assertive without being controlling. Heaven forfend that this woman, like many women with careers, is bitchy in general! In that case, she may be outright incapable of working with logi…

I'm sorry, what? I'm a man, I made a statement about men which I do not find offensive. You edited it to be offensive to women , and that's supposed to make me feel offense? No. I'd recommend you also ask a woman for her opinion, though, in case my male-ness has prevented me from seeing the obvious. For future reference, statements made about privileged groups are not, generally, as offensive as those made about the…

His point is that it's offensive to prejudge all men in tech as incapable or unwilling to treat women as equal individuals. This sentiment is rooted in the idea that most men are not sexist, chauvinist, assholes. Those individuals who can't even be bothered to endure the torment of a male teacher lest they be patronized or spoken to with a tone of condescension are probably not well balanced people.

From another perspective, would you think it reasonable for black men to avoid tech because of "a thousand previous encounters with [white]men who were abjectly unable to interact with [black individuals] in a way that left them feeling comfortable"?

Re: When She Codes, The Revolution’s Coming

#122

Post by daxelrod »

prodigal_erik wrote: post #101
radarsat1 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that it's not a gender problem, or at least not only a gender problem. But the problem being more general does not necessarily imply that the solution should be equally general. I think a class like this might be just thing thing to get a certain class of women interested in programming, which is never a bad thing, even if it doesn't help people like your granddad. A similar class for older people might be ju…

Never a bad thing? The median male developer is so inept at writing correct software that the industry would be better off without him. If these women weren't irresistibly drawn to the work, how can we expect them to be substantially better, rather than merely doubling the amount of crap we're already struggling with? If anything, we need a much tougher filter before we go out and entice the masses.

You've expressed an ivory tower viewpoint. Forget the "industry". These people are learning to code for themselves, to scratch their own itches.

I encourage you to think less like a software engineer and more like a hacker. These people are gaining greater digital literacy. They are gaining the tools to solve their own problems.

Only a few of them will take up software as a profession. They will be subject to the same filtering process as everyone else.

Re: When She Codes, The Revolution’s Coming

#123

Post by lrhot9 »

ceol wrote: post #119
lrhot9 wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is discrimination the only possible explanation for the empirical lack of women? If you're sure it is, and you're actually interested in these questions, investigating discrimination in tech when you could be investigating discrimination in higher mathematics is like studying swedish-norwegian racism when you could be studying black-white racism. You don't need personal experience, just casually google it for a while…

Of course it's not the only possible explanation; however, it's the most realistic explanation given the number of women who have expressed disgust at the level of discrimination present in the tech industry. Your analogy doesn't make sense to me because, again, I'm not familiar with higher mathematics. I can't say, "Yes, higher mathematics relates to the tech industry like racism against Norwegians relates to racism…

So there can only be one explanation?

Re: When She Codes, The Revolution’s Coming

#124

Post by yummyfajitas »

ceol wrote: post #117
yummyfajitas wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your first link does not show evidence of discrimination. It claims that women are not present in computing because women are different from men in ways that make them poorly suited to a role in computing: "CS education works best for people who already know how to code before they begin. CS teaches the theory behind a practice in which they assume you already have some skill..." "CS education also focuses a lot of e…

You should have read the entire article. "I believe CS and Web Development currently select for certain masculine qualities that are largely unrelated to someone’s prowess as a coder. I believe it is these tangential code-cowboy qualities women are unable or unwilling to emulate, and not their skill or capacity for abstraction, problem solving, creative thinking, or communication — All of which actually make them bet…

Could you explain how context changes the substance of my quotes?

I realize the author doesn't believe that spending time on your work, improving your skills and solving abstract puzzles matter. Maybe she's right, though I prefer employees who don't need hand holding. But that's irrelevant - rewarding autodidacts, puzzle-lovers and hard workers is not discrimination.

Re: When She Codes, The Revolution’s Coming

#125

Post by ceol »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #124
ceol wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should have read the entire article. "I believe CS and Web Development currently select for certain masculine qualities that are largely unrelated to someone’s prowess as a coder. I believe it is these tangential code-cowboy qualities women are unable or unwilling to emulate, and not their skill or capacity for abstraction, problem solving, creative thinking, or communication — All of which actually make them bet…

Could you explain how context changes the substance of my quotes? I realize the author doesn't believe that spending time on your work, improving your skills and solving abstract puzzles matter. Maybe she's right, though I prefer employees who don't need hand holding. But that's irrelevant - rewarding autodidacts, puzzle-lovers and hard workers is not discrimination.

She wasn't talking about reasons why women are "poorly suited to a role in computing". She was talking about ways which CS could be bettered in general. For the first part you quoted, gender isn't even mentioned. The second quote? Full context:

"CS education also focuses a lot of effort on puzzles and very abstract concepts when practical applications where you can see the why and how might work better for women (and a hell of a lot of men). I like yummy algorithms, but we could make CS education more accessible by putting them in context."

Your third quote has to do with the environment that exists— not because women don't inherently participate.

Re: When She Codes, The Revolution’s Coming

#126

Post by ceol »

lrhot9 wrote: post #123
ceol wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course it's not the only possible explanation; however, it's the most realistic explanation given the number of women who have expressed disgust at the level of discrimination present in the tech industry. Your analogy doesn't make sense to me because, again, I'm not familiar with higher mathematics. I can't say, "Yes, higher mathematics relates to the tech industry like racism against Norwegians relates to racism…

So there can only be one explanation?

There's a main explanation. Do you have another that might suffice?

Re: When She Codes, The Revolution’s Coming

#127

Post by lrhot9 »

ceol wrote: post #126
lrhot9 wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So there can only be one explanation?

There's a main explanation. Do you have another that might suffice?

Alright, if discrimination is the main explanation, what's the second most important explanation? The third? Why are you sure they're less important than discrimination?

Re: When She Codes, The Revolution’s Coming

#128

Post by yummyfajitas »

ceol wrote: post #125
yummyfajitas wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you explain how context changes the substance of my quotes? I realize the author doesn't believe that spending time on your work, improving your skills and solving abstract puzzles matter. Maybe she's right, though I prefer employees who don't need hand holding. But that's irrelevant - rewarding autodidacts, puzzle-lovers and hard workers is not discrimination.

She wasn't talking about reasons why women are "poorly suited to a role in computing". She was talking about ways which CS could be bettered in general. For the first part you quoted, gender isn't even mentioned. The second quote? Full context: "CS education also focuses a lot of effort on puzzles and very abstract concepts when practical applications where you can see the why and how might work better for women (and…

She was talking about ways which CS could be bettered in general.

From the article: "She said that CS is the only science where the participation of women is getting worse not better. We have a problem. We’re geeks (supposed to be good at problem solving). So let’s figure it out!

I think we should look at:

[The bulleted list from which I quoted some items]"

According to her, these particular items are reasons why women specifically are not participating in tech.

And again - focusing a CS class on algorithms is not discrimination.

Re: When She Codes, The Revolution’s Coming

#129

Post by ceol »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #128
ceol wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

She wasn't talking about reasons why women are "poorly suited to a role in computing". She was talking about ways which CS could be bettered in general. For the first part you quoted, gender isn't even mentioned. The second quote? Full context: "CS education also focuses a lot of effort on puzzles and very abstract concepts when practical applications where you can see the why and how might work better for women (and…

She was talking about ways which CS could be bettered in general. From the article: "She said that CS is the only science where the participation of women is getting worse not better. We have a problem. We’re geeks (supposed to be good at problem solving). So let’s figure it out! I think we should look at: [The bulleted list from which I quoted some items]" According to her, these particular items are reasons why wom…

They're reasons why women are not participating— not reasons why "women are different from men in ways that make them poorly suited to a role in computing". There is a huge difference.

No one is saying a class on algorithms is discrimination. Are you intentionally misconstruing her article or are you truly this confused?

Re: When She Codes, The Revolution’s Coming

#130

Post by ceol »

lrhot9 wrote: post #127
ceol wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a main explanation. Do you have another that might suffice?

Alright, if discrimination is the main explanation, what's the second most important explanation? The third? Why are you sure they're less important than discrimination?

I'm not the one saying there's another realistic explanation. You should direct those questions at someone who is.
Post reply on HN