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

Tech's DEI backlash is here

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 221 posts

Re: Tech's DEI backlash is here

#191

Post by KaiserPro »

nvm0n2 wrote: post #184
KaiserPro wrote: post #29

I don't quite understand the anger that DEI gets, unless people assume that people are only hired because they belong to a certain group. I'm not US based, so I only see that "safe for UK" view of what $Company blast over to us. Musk and Thiel see the world in very specific ways. Because they are who they are, and the people that surround them, they will not change their view unless something drastic happens. They si…

It's not a US thing. If you think it is, you're just not being told about it by the news sources you read. Just a few days ago the head of a large UK insurance company stated directly to Parliament that she insisted on personally reviewing any attempt to hire a "non diverse" person, whilst "diverse" (i.e. non male British) could be hired more easily. This is by far not the only such example in British life. So this t…

> If you only read the Guardian

come on, the gruaniad ceased to be a newspaper many years ago.

the source: https://committees.parliament.uk/oralevidence/14007/html/

q141 actually makes a fair bit of sense, as its a insurance company who are the generally masters of hiring Henno who went to a good school, not Terry who's talented.

Moreover, its not "we directly discriminate" its "I question to make sure that the procedure is followed". Which is different.

Bear in mind, this is for rich senior insurance execs, who have a fucktonne of money to take people to court, you're sure as shit going to be sure that the policies they are talking about are going to be water fucking tight. Also, as its insurance, there are about 5 women who are that senior, so the CEO is going to be doing a lot of asking if the procedure is being followed.

Re: Tech's DEI backlash is here

#192

Post by minerva23 »

Manuel_D wrote: post #170
minerva23 wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> diverse candidate Even though some people would call me that, I've always hated that term/ideology. I wish companies would shift their mindset to, "a candidate that adds to our diversity". E.g. my current employer has done a really good job at not discriminating too much against women and attracting women, so we're well above industry average in our woman:NB:man ratio so it's more representative of the source popul…

> > We have already selected a male candidate for the internship so it'd be best if the next one was a woman > This is both true and legal Absolutely not. Using any protected class (race, gender, religion, disability, etc.) in hiring decisions is illegal unless this is a bona fide occupational qualification [1]. You can deliberately hire a Black person to play Frederick Douglass in a move. You cannot deliberately hir…

> Using any protected class

Right. And they're saying it would be best if they weren't accidentally doing that.

> DEI isn't an anti-discrimination effort, they are actively carrying out discrimination

Why do you think this? All efforts I've seen have been to correct for the discrimination currently occurring in the system.

> You admit that women are overrepresented

I don't. We're still substantially less than 50% of engineering.

> The evidence in tech company hiring actually shows women are favored over men

If this were true, men would be the minority. Women like money just as much as men do, and would leverage that non-existent favoritism to get those high paying jobs.

Re: Tech's DEI backlash is here

#193

Post by Manuel_D »

gmm1990 wrote: post #189
Manuel_D wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea that society influences women not to go into STEM is not at all clear. It's essentially just assuming that any disparity must be due to social influence. The reality is that larger male participation in STEM is universal across a wide variety of societies. There isn't a single country in the world where women make up more than 55% of STEM workers, while the vast majority of countries have fewer than 30% of w…

Interesting that different society’s have such different levels of female participation in stem. I’d view that as evidence that society heavily influences these gender participation rates.

This is not at all what is described in the article. They don't have different levels of participation in STEM. Nearly every single country in the world has a majority male STEM participation. Most fall within a relatively tight band between 15 and 35%.

Re: Tech's DEI backlash is here

#194

Post by [deleted] »

minerva23 wrote: post #192
Manuel_D wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> > We have already selected a male candidate for the internship so it'd be best if the next one was a woman > This is both true and legal Absolutely not. Using any protected class (race, gender, religion, disability, etc.) in hiring decisions is illegal unless this is a bona fide occupational qualification [1]. You can deliberately hire a Black person to play Frederick Douglass in a move. You cannot deliberately hir…

> Using any protected class Right. And they're saying it would be best if they weren't accidentally doing that. > DEI isn't an anti-discrimination effort, they are actively carrying out discrimination Why do you think this? All efforts I've seen have been to correct for the discrimination currently occurring in the system. > You admit that women are overrepresented I don't. We're still substantially less than 50% of…

[deleted]

Re: Tech's DEI backlash is here

#196

Post by Hnrobert42 »

ThrowawayR2 wrote: post #106
Hnrobert42 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmm. I see what you are saying, but it totally discounts the value of diversity of thought. For example, there is an optical illusion where people see the top line as shorter: >—- However, they are the same length. (The illusion is more pronounced with hand drawn lines.) Everyone falls for this illusion across all countries and cultures, so much so that folks hypothesized it is affected by our biology. Well, until so…

The illusion you refer to is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%BCller-Lyer_illusion but the "Variations in perception" section mentions the African tribesmen finding that you are using to support your point was contradicted by later research. (This sort of thing is why I distrust many statements asserted as fact without citations by posters on HN; too often they turn out to be incorrect, incomplete, or out of date.)

I appreciate that link. It seems subsequent research did not contradict it. I am open to changing my mind, but in the section about perception, it lists numerous studies that found differences between populations. It does not appear the differences have been definitively explained. I’m not sure how you concluded that either the research or my point were contradicted, but again, I’m open to the being wrong. I often am.

Re: Tech's DEI backlash is here

#197

Post by Hnrobert42 »

abduhl wrote: post #83
Hnrobert42 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmm. I see what you are saying, but it totally discounts the value of diversity of thought. For example, there is an optical illusion where people see the top line as shorter: >—- However, they are the same length. (The illusion is more pronounced with hand drawn lines.) Everyone falls for this illusion across all countries and cultures, so much so that folks hypothesized it is affected by our biology. Well, until so…

The real problem is the assumption race or gender are not only accurate proxies for diversity of thought (they’re not), but that they’re actually better proxies than just looking for diversity of thought directly. You want more people from poor backgrounds so that you can take into account lower socioeconomic viewpoints? Well, the modern DEI answer to that is hire a black person. The correct answer is to hire someone…

Yes. You make a good point. I would fully support a system that account for diversity of thought directly. That’s hard to do. Your suggestion of means testing applicants is interesting. Do you have others?

Re: Tech's DEI backlash is here

#198

Post by xvector »

archagon wrote: post #162
xvector wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Coworkers can get alienated by anything. If someone that looks disfigured makes their colleagues uncomfortable, should they be fired? What about someone that holds a religion that makes their colleagues uncomfortable? Should they be fired? Firing people because they make you uncomfortable is ridiculous. It's possible to be a grown-up adult and move on with your life if something makes you uncomfortable.

Firing someone because they published a controversial manifesto at work is the farthest thing from surprising.

I don't think it would make a difference if he published it on a private blog, and people at work saw it. Cancel culture doesn't differentiate between your work and personal life.

Re: Tech's DEI backlash is here

#199

Post by Hnrobert42 »

Always_Anon wrote: post #99
Hnrobert42 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmm. I see what you are saying, but it totally discounts the value of diversity of thought. For example, there is an optical illusion where people see the top line as shorter: >—- However, they are the same length. (The illusion is more pronounced with hand drawn lines.) Everyone falls for this illusion across all countries and cultures, so much so that folks hypothesized it is affected by our biology. Well, until so…

>Everyone falls for this illusion across all countries and cultures, so much so that folks hypothesized it is affected by our biology. Well, until some anthropologist showed it to some African tribesman. It turns out they were not susceptible to that form of illusion at all. It is unclear why. That was disproven. This is scientific racism/bio-essentialism. Let's not go there, it's an evil path.

Ah. I don’t see where it was disproven. The Wikipedia article about it seems to indicate the difference in perception between various populations was further substantiated.

My contention nor original researchers, so far as I can tell, claimed the difference was based on race or biology. It looks like they thought it had to do with the presence of rectilinear buildings, thus cultural.

Some subsequent research did hypothesize eye pigmentation played a role and that was disproven. However, as far as I can tell, different groups of people have differing abilities to perceive illusions.

Moreover, my fundamental point was that culture affects thought, and a variety of thought is valuable. Do you dispute either of those points?

Re: Tech's DEI backlash is here

#200

Post by archagon »

xvector wrote: post #198
archagon wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firing someone because they published a controversial manifesto at work is the farthest thing from surprising.

I don't think it would make a difference if he published it on a private blog, and people at work saw it. Cancel culture doesn't differentiate between your work and personal life.

This is an unfalsifiable statement.
Post reply on HN