61–70 of 72 posts
Maybe I overlooked it, but I didn't see any mention of the size of the intern class. A 2:1 ratio in a very small class has quite different implications than a 2:1 ratio in a very large class.
How can people who claim to be meritocratic immediately cry "discrimination! misandry!" when women outperform men? Yep, must have been discrimination, because we all know women can never be better candidates unless there's something else going on. And being excited about a historically underrepresented group overcoming adversity isn't the same thing as "we are favoring primarily women applications". Anyone who's actu…
Yep, must have been discrimination, because we all know women can never be better candidates unless there's something else going on. It's not that women can never be better candidates, it is merely that this is unlikely . Consider a set of applications, 20% of which come from women (fairly typical numbers, from what I've read). Assume women and men are equally skilled. If 30 interns are selected without bias, the odd…
From this post: "Even though we all knew it wouldn’t last as acceptances come in (it already hasn’t held), our team enjoyed a brief moment basking in the future that we (and all educators around the world) hope to build"
They never said they extended offers to more women than men and they never said the actual class had more women than men, they simply highlighted a point in the process that had more women than men and used it as an opportunity to be optimistic about the future.
But thanks for using math and stuff to enlighten us all.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And what I'm asking you is: can you come up with any possible explanations for an increase in women devs over time that should be celebrated, especially at an organization that values equal education for everyone, without first wondering if our interview questions have changed ?
Can you come up with any possible explanation period? You're dodging my question.
Is this a 3 sigma deviation? Maybe. Or could it be that, on average, women might be drawn to educational software more than other types? Doesn't sound unreasonable.
Regardless, your insistence on an explanation shows that you're still stuck in the bad old days.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One thing Fog Creek did was we hunted harder for qualified women applicants, which meant we actually had to go to female tech recruiting events. The problem is that there are few female developers to start with, and they are all heavily recruited by large software companies (Google, Microsoft, etc) already. The larger companies have big budgets to devote to this and encourage the very small number of women developers…
And that's fine but did you get a 2 to 1 f/m ratio after you increased your female recruitment? That's what I'm trying to get to the bottom of.
Having worked with Kamens, including interviewing the same candidates, I can't even entertain the idea that the interviews were rigged in some way, which is you abhorrent implication.
We see 2:1 male to female ratios all the time, and no one bats an eye. But when it gets flipped we need to figure out why?
Regardless of how it came to be, this is a win for our industry, as it sets an example that the numbers don't need to be so heavily skewed towards men.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Assuming men and women are equally skilled is a big assumption. Given that few women enter CS, and many who do leave, it would not be surprising to find that the remaining women who have not been selected out somehow are in fact more skilled than the average male engineer.
Your reasoning contains no fact specific to women. Thus, it should be valid for me to substitute any other group which is underrepresented in computing: Given that few retards enter CS, and many who do leave, it would not be surprising to find that the remaining retards who have not been selected out somehow are in fact more skilled than the average non-retard engineer. It also still doesn't make a >60% women class r…
That said the probability point is a good one.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And that's fine but did you get a 2 to 1 f/m ratio after you increased your female recruitment? That's what I'm trying to get to the bottom of.
Why does an investigation need to be launched? Having worked with Kamens, including interviewing the same candidates, I can't even entertain the idea that the interviews were rigged in some way, which is you abhorrent implication. We see 2:1 male to female ratios all the time, and no one bats an eye. But when it gets flipped we need to figure out why? Regardless of how it came to be, this is a win for our industry, a…
Simple probability. A 2:1 male environment is completely reasonable in a gender neutral process, whereas a 2:1 female environment is exceedingly unlikely to occur under such a process.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Assuming men and women are equally skilled is a big assumption. Given that few women enter CS, and many who do leave, it would not be surprising to find that the remaining women who have not been selected out somehow are in fact more skilled than the average male engineer.
Your reasoning contains no fact specific to women. Thus, it should be valid for me to substitute any other group which is underrepresented in computing: Given that few retards enter CS, and many who do leave, it would not be surprising to find that the remaining retards who have not been selected out somehow are in fact more skilled than the average non-retard engineer. It also still doesn't make a >60% women class r…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The parent is describing the postmodern definition of Meritocracy where "merit" is just a point view. In that world all achievements/failures must be evaluated in light of the person or group's privilege/race/class/gender and sexuality. People who subscribe to this definition really don't believe in meritocracy as it's generally viewed as a way to institutionalize white male advantage. Just a heads up :)
It's disheartening to watch online communities turn on themselves as they become infected with the cancer of postmodern feminism. It's a bullying, disempowering, dissent-crushing and divisive[1] ideology that erases individual experiences, obsesses over things one cannot control, demonizes nuance, and glorifies experiencing alleged "oppression", as defined in Marxist terms. It's toxic . Unless things change, the evap…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am not sure whether this is what the parent meant. I mean one way of looking at it is that the more people from completely different backgrounds do things, the more interesting the work gets. E.g. it is possible that some people (teens, women) have a better perspective on solving some problems that affect them more. I generally support the success of more people from varied backgrounds in tech. Mainly because it ma…
E.g. it is possible that some people (teens, women) have a better perspective on solving some problems that affect them more. Is it possible that some people (men, whites, asians) have a better perspective on solving some problems?
Meritocracy is like traditional view of objectivity that knowledge exists without the knower. Truth of the matter is, knowledge exists without the knower but it is not independent of the knower. This is why 14 year olds writing app is a reason for celebration and why encouraging more females is a good thing. By doing so, we allow our work to expand to incorporate the values that those group represent, which is import…
Maybe I'm missing something, but isn't it the exact opposite of a meritocracy? If someone makes something awesome, it doesn't really matter if they're 14 year olds, women, men or aliens. I know at least I'd high five someone who made something cool, regardless of gender/age/other factors.
For example, if you have a computer science scientist judging the validity of a physics experiment, you are not doing the physicist and physics justice, are you? If your meritocracy supports computer scientists, what chance does the physicist have?