Tech industry is imploding, there is no need whatsoever to push women (or men) into a career in tech that has very limited opportunities at the moment.
Girls in Tech closes its doors after 17 years
31–40 of 520 posts
Re: Girls in Tech closes its doors after 17 years
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, computing is a profession where historically women were not only good at it, they were nearly exclusively occupying the industry. When pay went up it inverted and that is really the problem. Men colonized computing and pushed women out only when it became a source of good income and respected as a profession.
> When pay went up it inverted and that is really the problem. Men colonized computing and pushed women out only when it became a source of good income and respected as a profession. You're using some loaded terms there. How exactly did men "push" women out of computing? Women were just as free as men to create their own tech startups. Yet in the past 50 years most tech startups and today's tech giants were created b…
You're conflating entrepreneur with engineer. Different skills entirely, which is why Jobs was never famous for his code and Wozniak isn't famous for his reality distortion field.
Re: Girls in Tech closes its doors after 17 years
#33[deleted]
Re: Girls in Tech closes its doors after 17 years
#34Just skimming the 2022 990, executive compensation was $285,170. Total expenses $1,904,475 on $2,005,994 in revenue.
Unfortunately this is normal, because running a non-profit is hard enough that suitable candidates command high salaries. I was on an NPO board with a similar ratio and we couldn't get it down.
Re: Girls in Tech closes its doors after 17 years
#35Non-profits closing means there is a financial reason; were there grants monies that ran out? Did another "women in STEM" non-profit get corporate sponsorship instead? The article doesn't say.
The (economic) purpose of Girls in Tech is to create more workers in software so that prices for labor will go down. Given the layoffs of 2022-ongoing, labor costs in tech are dropping enough that interested parties aren't incentivized to increase the supply of labor further.
> so that prices for labor will go down
wut? Any one creating anything is DELIBERATELY driving price of that thing down for you I guess.
Re: Girls in Tech closes its doors after 17 years
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
every group tries to fight for equality and once thats achieved or close to achieved, they try to fight for an advantage, it is unfortunately rooted in the selfishness of human beings. Women seem to be attending college in greater numbers than men, soon we'll need programs to help men get a boost.
Removed.
"another-dave" posted some in an adjacent comment:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40926228
Or did you mean something different?
Re: Girls in Tech closes its doors after 17 years
#37The reasons for closing haven't really been elaborated on, just commented on as sad and devastating; I haven't managed to glean anything more from the rest of the article.
However, it's incredible to me to keep an organization like this going for 17 years. The landscape is constantly shifting and looking back at the world and technology from 2007, and even 2014, they've survived a lot. Going down now just shows how bad the market is in reality.
Re: Girls in Tech closes its doors after 17 years
#38Non-profits closing means there is a financial reason; were there grants monies that ran out? Did another "women in STEM" non-profit get corporate sponsorship instead? The article doesn't say.
The (economic) purpose of Girls in Tech is to create more workers in software so that prices for labor will go down. Given the layoffs of 2022-ongoing, labor costs in tech are dropping enough that interested parties aren't incentivized to increase the supply of labor further.
For the corporate donors, sure. Im sure the people running it were genuine though.
Re: Girls in Tech closes its doors after 17 years
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, computing is a profession where historically women were not only good at it, they were nearly exclusively occupying the industry. When pay went up it inverted and that is really the problem. Men colonized computing and pushed women out only when it became a source of good income and respected as a profession.
I've heard this before but I read a book called "Computing in the Middle Ages" which was a memoir of a man who worked on the SAGE, LINC and Xerox Parc projects. According to him, programming especially in the batch era was a highly social and manpower intensive activity with a large community of support staff and operators around the computer. People who wrote the actual instructions did so on coding sheets, which th…
Also, I believe they’ve flipped cause and effect. They claim that pay went up then men moved in, but they’ve actually found the opposite.
When men begin to dominate an industry, pay overall rises. When women begin to equal the number of men in a field, pay overall falls.
So there’s not a single issue, but really a whole host of interconnected issues that are hard to untangle.
Re: Girls in Tech closes its doors after 17 years
#40Just skimming the 2022 990, executive compensation was $285,170. Total expenses $1,904,475 on $2,005,994 in revenue.
Unfortunately this is normal, because running a non-profit is hard enough that suitable candidates command high salaries. I was on an NPO board with a similar ratio and we couldn't get it down.
300k isn’t crazy especially in SF that s not going up get you far