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

MIT abandons requirement of DEI statements for hiring and promotions

whyevolutionistrue.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

471–480 of 807 posts

Re: MIT abandons requirement of DEI statements for hiring and promotions

#471

Post by skissane »

sobriquet9 wrote: post #158
jimbokun wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A brutal truth is that wealthy, upper class people have resources for training their kids that legitimately better prepare them for academic success than poorer kids. The rich, smart kids in this example were Jews.

In USSR, nobody was rich.

> In USSR, nobody was rich.

Despite Soviet propaganda to the contrary, social class continued to exist in the USSR.

At the top of the class hierarchy, were senior party officials and their families.

Next rung down were university-educated professionals (doctors, engineers, scientists, etc)

Then came skilled factory workers, etc

Unskilled labourers were near the bottom of the Soviet class hierarchy

Re: MIT abandons requirement of DEI statements for hiring and promotions

#472

Post by porknubbins »

hotdogscout wrote: post #239
the-smug-one wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm pretty sure that "cultural Marxism" is a conspiracy theory, so I'd probably downvote you for that still. Seriously, what is your definition of cultural Marxism? I'm not gonna respond by picking it apart or whatever, I'll just read it and write "thank you" as a response after you've posted it.

The culture of class revenge/justice that fuels Marxism. "The tradition of Marxist cultural analysis has also been referred to as "cultural Marxism", and "Marxist cultural theory", in reference to Marxist ideas about culture." https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxist_cultural_analysis It is >also< a name used by people who believe in a conspiracy theory about egalitarian politics.

Thank you I meant the first one, I did not know about the specific conspiracy theory.

Re: MIT abandons requirement of DEI statements for hiring and promotions

#473

Post by nsagent »

dgfitz wrote: post #454
noobermin wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This comment does not make sense in reply to this question...where did they say anything about evaluation, the point they made is the difference it made is their advisor doing outreach.

I made the mental leap of “the advisor reached out because they saw the potential” which I assumed… was assumed.

In this case, "outreach" means [1]:

  the extending of services or assistance beyond current or usual limits

  | an outreach program
[1]: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/outreach#dictiona...

Re: MIT abandons requirement of DEI statements for hiring and promotions

#474

Post by frickinLasers »

Seattle3503 wrote: post #353
eapressoandcats wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The American obsession with race is deeply rooted in historically having a large, enslaved underclass that was kept down using racial justifications and against which there is still measurable bias across all areas of life (hiring, police stops, criminal sentencing, etc.) It’s not unique to America but it is a major differentiator from other countries. A key thing to note is that many homogeneous countries are extrem…

> A key thing to note is that many homogeneous countries are extremely racist but don’t notice it because it doesn’t hugely impact day to day life It is 10 years old, but WaPo created a map of how people responded to a question about someone of another race being their neighbor. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2013/05/15... to add to what you said, racism probably doesn't impact anyone they know eit…

Wow, this is an illuminating map. Restores a bit of faith in Western values.

Re: MIT abandons requirement of DEI statements for hiring and promotions

#475

Post by throwaway22032 »

zeroonetwothree wrote: post #465
throwaway22032 wrote: post #423

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi - as a counterpoint, I think that inequality is desirable. In a world with limited resources I think it makes sense to allocate more resources towards people who perform acts for society which require rare skill sets, talent, etc. That might mean more money, it might mean land, it might mean status, or anything else really. The idea being that those rewards both serve as motivation and also help those people to fo…

I think that you are arguing against equity not equality . Usually the latter means “equality of opportunity”. At least that’s typically the difference in most debates.

I don't consider there to be a difference.

A society in which the children of successful people are prioritised over the children of unsuccessful people is almost certain to lead to better outcomes for exactly the same reasons.

I came from an underprivileged background myself, if I were investing money with an aim to generating a return, I'd far sooner give it to a banker's son than someone from the estate I grew up on. I was the exception, not the rule, and the older I get the more I figure I must just be some sort of genetic freak, since the overwhelming opinion seems to be that our fate is predestined, nowadays.

Re: MIT abandons requirement of DEI statements for hiring and promotions

#476

Post by qujine »

> I have posted quite a bit about them (see collection here), and object to them because they are not only compelled speech and are often completely irrelevant to what you’re applying for, but also ignore the fact that there are many ways to make contributions to society beyond enacting DEI. (For example, what about a college applicant who has taught illiterate adults to read?)

That is DEI. The writer is either confused or gaslighting for their own agenda.

Re: MIT abandons requirement of DEI statements for hiring and promotions

#477

Post by karaterobot »

steve_taylor wrote: post #379

It's quite telling that the MIT president was too scared to announce this despite only 1 in 20 faculty supporting DEI statements.

Just want to note that, currently, this is the highest comment in the thread which makes any direct references to the article we're all nominally discussing, and it's about 100 comments down. Have an extra upvote.

Re: MIT abandons requirement of DEI statements for hiring and promotions

#478

Post by kelipso »

dgfitz wrote: post #454
noobermin wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This comment does not make sense in reply to this question...where did they say anything about evaluation, the point they made is the difference it made is their advisor doing outreach.

I made the mental leap of “the advisor reached out because they saw the potential” which I assumed… was assumed.

No it's not on an individual basis, outreach work means something more like the professor talked to a group of students about their work and what they can do to join their lab for a phd. There are lots and lots of undergrads who don't know a thing about graduate school.

Re: MIT abandons requirement of DEI statements for hiring and promotions

#479

Post by shadowgovt »

zarathustreal wrote: post #447
shadowgovt wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Declaration declares people were "created equal," and even that phrase has historical context to answer "in what sense?" Nobody is born with divine right of kings. That's the point. Other senses of equality come later and with good reason.

I disagree that “other senses of equality” come with “good reason.” In fact, I find it to be an insidious corruption of the meaning of the word to further the agenda of those in power. That’s exactly how evil works. Wolves in sheep’s clothing. “Standing for equality” while owning more wealth than 98% of the population.

There have been, more or less, two major modifications to the Constitution. We are now on version 3, depending on how you slice it.

There have also been modifications to our understanding of freedoms. The old comprehension of freedoms the government should safeguard evolved to freedom of speech (and expression), freedom of worship, freedom from want, and freedom from fear.

It's okay for people to decide there are more equalities relevant than the simple protection against divine birthright mandates. Especially since we've had hundreds of years to witness the consequences of believing that kind of equality is all that matters.

> “Standing for equality” while owning more wealth than 98% of the population.

I'm afraid I'd have to know who you are thinking of as wolves in sheep's clothing to know what you mean here.

Re: MIT abandons requirement of DEI statements for hiring and promotions

#480

Post by kelipso »

WalterBright wrote: post #371
OJFord wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Edit: what are the arguments against this? I happen not to agree with them, but leaving that aside they're often that Ok fine, it's a pipeline problem^, but the solution is to address that at every stage, not just the beginning. (^meaning for example schoolgirls aren't sufficiently interested and encouraged into STEM so university applications are low, so admissions are low, so graduations are low, so job applicati…

STEM is something you gotta have some substantial internal motivation to do, such as doing it for a hobby. The kind of work I enjoy, you gotta really like it or it isn't going to work out for you. For example, I was taking machines apart when I was 7 trying to figure out how they worked. I'd break open resistors to see what was inside - just baffling grey dust. Eventually I took bicycles apart, then engines, then who…

Maybe decades ago when college students based their choice of majors on feelings or whatever that might have been true. Nowadays college students are much more practical. An obvious example is the rise in CS majors in the last decade.

The notion of substantial motivation or hobby to go into STEM is absolutely ridiculous.

Post reply on HN