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

Mark Zuckerberg blamed Sheryl Sandberg for Meta 'inclusivity' push: report

msn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 98 posts

Re: Mark Zuckerberg blamed Sheryl Sandberg for Meta 'inclusivity' push: report

#81

Post by Manuel_D »

kiitos wrote: post #72
Manuel_D wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Using protected class as a factor in employment is prohibited nation-wide under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. There is no "balance" between equality of opportunity and equality of outcome. The former is required by law. Using protected class as a factor in hiring doesn't become legal just because it's done in pursuit of equality of outcome. They are not both valid concepts, at least not unless you're wil…

You are focusing on the specific details of the hiring process, and evaluating stuff like DEI in terms of a single hiring outcome. I'm trying to clarify that the relevant scope is actually much broader, for example it might be the demographics of the entire engineering org within that company, measured after this updated hiring process has been in place for a year or more.

Again, deliberately engineering equitable demographics of the entire engineering org is illegal discrimination. Scope is irrelevant. You cannot use protected class as a factor in hiring, not in a single hiring decision nor in the broader scope of an entire org. Lets say you measure the hiring demographics over the span of a year. What then ? Directing your recruiters to prioritize underrepresented candidates is still illegal. It doesn't matter whether the scope is a single hire or an entire org: equality in hiring is mandatory.

It's not a question of scope. Equality and equity are not equally valid concepts in hiring. The former is required by law, even if it produces an inequitable outcome. There is no "balance" between respecting candidates civil liberties and achieving your preferred demographic distribution.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg blamed Sheryl Sandberg for Meta 'inclusivity' push: report

#82

Post by [deleted] »

kiitos wrote: post #68
Manuel_D wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every company I worked at grades interviews based once correctness and performance. A candidate that fails to produce a working solution at all receives a worse score than one that produces a working, but inefficient solution, which get a worse score than one that has a working and optimal solution. And again, if the bias comes from people's tone then the interview can be conducted over text. Or have a transcript of…

You continue to focus very narrowly on the specific details of the hiring process. I'm trying to make points about higher-level stuff, related to the intent and scope of DEI-type initiatives. From these few comments, I gather that you're not really interested in talking about any of those higher-level things, so I'll stop trying to explain them.

[deleted]

Re: Mark Zuckerberg blamed Sheryl Sandberg for Meta 'inclusivity' push: report

#83

Post by Manuel_D »

t8sr wrote: post #67
Manuel_D wrote: post #14

To be clear, Meta's "Diverse Slate Approach" was explicitly discriminatory with regards to protected class. It prohibited hiring managers from proceeding with an offer until at least one of the on-site interviews contained an "underrepresented group", meaning women and URM males. In practice this meant that white and Asian men had to wait a long time to get an offer even after they passed the interview rounds. But wo…

What you're describing is not how it works. Chiefly, the hiring pipelines are not set up for a single role, but a whole family of them. They are filled ahead of need. (Or were, at a time when this would've been taking place.) There are other inaccuracies, but suffice it to say, this comment section is full of comments by people who have never been hiring managers talking about how hiring works.

I re-read the wiki page on the DSA multiple times. It does explicitly spell out that at least one "diverse" candidate must be on the slate for each role. Yes, candidates are considered for multiple roles as they go through the hiring pipeline, but that doesn't change the fact that it prohibits moving forward with a hire if the candidate pool for the role does not include a diverse candidate.

If this is wrong, but all means explain how the DSA actually works.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg blamed Sheryl Sandberg for Meta 'inclusivity' push: report

#84

Post by sulam »

xxreasonable wrote: post #75
kiitos wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not -- "why wouldn't we expect important career X to have way more men than women, given " It's -- "if important career X has way more men than women, is this a good thing, at a net societal level, regardless of that can explain why this is the case?" Nobody is looking for complete and perfect parity in all influential careers. The intent is just to make sure that, for the highest-impact careers, we should work…

Do you believe some better out come for society as a whole, or some individuals in society will benefit from this intervention? Why? And at what cost? Your question implies serval beliefs, which may or may not be true. And that others may, or may not share. For one, I don’t think the average developer has a ton of say on how products get made. So that’s not likely the power you’re seeking to ensure changes hands? Mar…

It is well established that teams with more representation make better decisions, likely because of their diversity of viewpoints. It is worthwhile both to companies and to society to have higher quality decision-making in fields like finance and in roles like chief executives.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg blamed Sheryl Sandberg for Meta 'inclusivity' push: report

#85

Post by mike_hearn »

t8sr wrote: post #67
Manuel_D wrote: post #14

To be clear, Meta's "Diverse Slate Approach" was explicitly discriminatory with regards to protected class. It prohibited hiring managers from proceeding with an offer until at least one of the on-site interviews contained an "underrepresented group", meaning women and URM males. In practice this meant that white and Asian men had to wait a long time to get an offer even after they passed the interview rounds. But wo…

What you're describing is not how it works. Chiefly, the hiring pipelines are not set up for a single role, but a whole family of them. They are filled ahead of need. (Or were, at a time when this would've been taking place.) There are other inaccuracies, but suffice it to say, this comment section is full of comments by people who have never been hiring managers talking about how hiring works.

Nothing you just said contradicts the OP in any way, as those details don't change any aspect of the argument.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg blamed Sheryl Sandberg for Meta 'inclusivity' push: report

#87

Post by 1vuio0pswjnm7 »

1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #47

Text-only: https://assets.msn.com/content/view/v2/Detail/en-in/AA1xolsJ

   curl https://assets.msn.com/content/view/v2/Detail/en-in/AA1xolsJ \
   |sed 's/.*body":"//;s/","readTimeMin.*//' \
   |tr -d '\n\134\xa0\xc2\xe2\x80\x93' > 1.htm

   firefox ./1.htm

Re: Mark Zuckerberg blamed Sheryl Sandberg for Meta 'inclusivity' push: report

#88

Post by kiitos »

gatlin wrote: post #77
kiitos wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You continue to focus very narrowly on the specific details of the hiring process. I'm trying to make points about higher-level stuff, related to the intent and scope of DEI-type initiatives. From these few comments, I gather that you're not really interested in talking about any of those higher-level things, so I'll stop trying to explain them.

The specific details of the hiring process are in question. You are running away from grappling with the (increasingly likely) possibility that bias wasn't the (only) driver in hiring disparity.

The point I'm trying to make is that the details of any specific hiring process aren't really germane to the overall discussion. Hiring disparity is a metric that's measured at a much higher level than any individual organization.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg blamed Sheryl Sandberg for Meta 'inclusivity' push: report

#89

Post by kiitos »

speakfreely wrote: post #74
kiitos wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You continue to focus very narrowly on the specific details of the hiring process. I'm trying to make points about higher-level stuff, related to the intent and scope of DEI-type initiatives. From these few comments, I gather that you're not really interested in talking about any of those higher-level things, so I'll stop trying to explain them.

You’ve explained your position and OP exposed the holes in your logic. Please don’t pretend to take the high road when someone has engaged with good faith discussion that didn’t end the way you hoped.

That's a pretty bizarre take on this dialog. But, you do you.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg blamed Sheryl Sandberg for Meta 'inclusivity' push: report

#90

Post by kiitos »

xxreasonable wrote: post #75
kiitos wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not -- "why wouldn't we expect important career X to have way more men than women, given " It's -- "if important career X has way more men than women, is this a good thing, at a net societal level, regardless of that can explain why this is the case?" Nobody is looking for complete and perfect parity in all influential careers. The intent is just to make sure that, for the highest-impact careers, we should work…

Do you believe some better out come for society as a whole, or some individuals in society will benefit from this intervention? Why? And at what cost? Your question implies serval beliefs, which may or may not be true. And that others may, or may not share. For one, I don’t think the average developer has a ton of say on how products get made. So that’s not likely the power you’re seeking to ensure changes hands? Mar…

It doesn't matter if the average developer has any say on how products get made. What matters is the salary that developers earn, in general, at a demographic level, is generally among the highest. And it's important that the highest-salary occupations in a society, are equally available to everyone in that society, invariant to class or race or gender or creed or anything else -- measured by outcome, not by opportunity.
Post reply on HN