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

Silicon Valley Isn’t a Meritocracy

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 188 posts

Re: Silicon Valley Isn’t a Meritocracy

#161

Post by hacker789 »

Crito wrote: post #108
hacker789 wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, there are too many pesky east-Asians and Indians. There might be a Jewish problem as well.

I'm not sure if you are making an intentional reference to this or not, but it does make an interesting counter-point to the assertion that mathematics is a meritocracy: http://arxiv.org/abs/1110.1556 "This is a special collection of problems that were given to select applicants during oral entrance exams to the math department of Moscow State University. These problems were designed to prevent Jews and other undesir…

I don't think that's a counter point; it's a long discontinued practice of deliberately discriminating against people of a given race because other people of that race were too successful.

It's not something I support, by the way, in case the sarcasm in my above comment wasn't apparent.

Re: Silicon Valley Isn’t a Meritocracy

#162

Post by wonderzombie »

newnewnew wrote: post #95
hacker789 wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In your mind, is it possible for someone to disagree with the article without "exemplifying the problem"? That's the issue with first-world "social-justice warriors", like the author of the linked opinion piece. If you disagree with their premises on factual grounds, you're labeled as part of the problem . It makes honest discussion impossible. For example, you completely ignored the point that PG made. You didn't ev…

In post-modern Marxist discourse, who is speaking matters more than what is being said[1]. There is literally no way a white male could win the argument. Since he belongs to the oppressive/over class, his viewpoint is corrupted and invalid. By the way, this is the bread and butter of what they teach to kids in the soft majors in university nowadays. [1] http://www.arts.uwaterloo.ca/~kwesthue/regiftedxmas12.html

"There is literally no way a white male could win the argument."

Where to begin?

"win the argument" -- in what other way could anyone "win" the argument? Who's the referee? This is such a backward and binary way of looking at this topic.

And that's as if the only way for this to move forward is to win or lose, and as if a white male must naturally adopt a dissenting opinion.

As for the rest, who knows? You can of course find the least articulate, most extreme examples of a heterogenous group of people and argue with that, and maybe you'll "win" the argument. But you haven't really contributed anything to the dialog except criticize something most people already disagree with. It's kind of a waste.

Re: Silicon Valley Isn’t a Meritocracy

#163

Post by wonderzombie »

crusso wrote: post #91
untog wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd tend to believe that if you have a badass business deal [...] a VC wouldn't say no because a person is black, female, gay, or all 3. But what data causes you to 'tend to believe'? That assumption is kind of at the heart of the article - not that SV is a pure meritocracy (I doubt many places in the world really are) but that people's perception is that it is a lot more meritocratic than it is - and no-one ever che…

But what data causes you to 'tend to believe'? Probably the same level of data behind the article we're discussing. If she had started the article with "I'm just basing this whole article on my own biases and no real data, but..." then we wouldn't really have much to argue about.

I think in this case the article is trying to shift the burden of proof. Why should it be on someone who's asking whether it's a meritocracy rather than on the folks who're repeating this claim? And if the answer is in the affirmative, let's have that discussion.

This isn't directed at you as such. Just that a lot of folks assume the burden of proof ought to be on the questioner(s) of this proposition rather than the proponent(s).

Re: Silicon Valley Isn’t a Meritocracy

#164

Post by wonderzombie »

crusso wrote: post #78
ForHackernews wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if there really are a bunch of young white males with the right "pedigree" who are getting money thrown at them without having demonstrated any real merit, then I withdraw my objection That's exactly what happens. You are much, much more likely to get funded if you're a young white (or perhaps asian) guy doing an undergrad at Stanford than if you're a black woman studying at Berkeley. Now, you can hand-wave about c…

So where is your data showing that?

Likewise, can we get some data providing (e.g.) negative indicators that race is a factor? A lack of correlation between gender/race and achievement would be useful.

As I said upthread, I don't think the burden of proof should rest solely on people who're questioning whether SV is basically a meritocracy. Either it's relatively easy to demonstrate that the claim is sound, or we have a lot more discussion ahead of us.

The important piece is not even so much to say categorically that "it's not a meritocracy," but to make the claim for data reciprocal. Ideally both positions should supply data, and in general I don't believe people expect data from folks who say "SV is meritocratic." People will rush to poke holes in people's arguments who claim the contrary, but I see a dearth of data & skepticism supporting the affirmative case.

If we're all supposed to be skeptical nerds, maybe we should apply a little more skepticism towards positions that, to skeptics like ourselves, would seem self-serving (i.e. it's basically is a meritocracy and therefore we needn't worry or take action).

Re: Silicon Valley Isn’t a Meritocracy

#165

Post by SilasX »

williamcotton wrote: post #157
newnewnew wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You realize that it is trivially easy to falsify your worldview by glancing at, say, Asian American SAT statistics? Measured ability varies widely across population groups, and not always in white guys' favor. Otherwise, every profession from the NBA to electrical engineering would be perfectly balanced like a college recruiter's pamphlet. Your statement is just a statement of faith, contradicting all available evide…

The burden of proof doesn't rest on the person arguing against your borderline phrenological explanations of intelligence. And yes, faith in humanity IS needed for an enlightened thinker. The meaning and purpose of life will never be proven. There is plenty of room for faith in our world of rationalism. You need more art in your life! The world is more than just a bunch of metrics in a spreadsheet to fret and argue a…

How is "different genes have different impact on different mental tasks" anything like a phrenological explanation?

Re: Silicon Valley Isn’t a Meritocracy

#166

Post by wonderzombie »

newnewnew wrote: post #111
mtrimpe wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And what if it's only moderately meritocratic? Or even below average? I'd love for PG to run an analysis once of what words occur most frequently in flagged posts and their comments. I don't think you could get a better representation of this community's unspoken biases than that. I'm also pretty sure you'd find that words like feminism, female, sexism e.a. would feature quite high on the list.

Maybe the community has a bias against pointless class warfare. You want to make an effective feminist statement in Silicon Valley? Start with a github profile.

Right, right. Let's skirt past the idea that men may be in any way responsible for the industry they dominate, and focus on the fact that women aren't creating enough GitHub profiles or having enough hackathons.

In addition to shifting the blame, this is a convenient way to avoid taking any sort of responsibility for our own behavior or our peers, so congratulations on squaring that circle.

Re: Silicon Valley Isn’t a Meritocracy

#167

Post by ars_technician »

beat wrote: post #123
ars_technician wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

liberals don't believe in meritocracies. They value labor and the 'effort' put into something. i.e. someone who dug ditches all day should receive more compensation than someone who wrote code for 2 hours.

Nonsense.

Intelligent response. Perhaps you should learn more about the labor theory of value. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value

Re: Silicon Valley Isn’t a Meritocracy

#168

Post by ars_technician »

bruceb wrote: post #121
ars_technician wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

liberals don't believe in meritocracies. They value labor and the 'effort' put into something. i.e. someone who dug ditches all day should receive more compensation than someone who wrote code for 2 hours.

Yeah those damn liberals. I totally heard Obama say ditch diggers should have offices in SV with foozball tables and fancy chairs and coders should be paid minimum wage.

What are you talking about? If you don't have anything intelligent to add to the conversation, don't post a comment. Learn about what Jon Stewart and others that follow Marxist theory mean when they refer to the value of labor being the most important thing: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value

Re: Silicon Valley Isn’t a Meritocracy

#169

Post by wonderzombie »

williamcotton wrote: post #144
newnewnew wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In post-modern Marxist discourse, who is speaking matters more than what is being said[1]. There is literally no way a white male could win the argument. Since he belongs to the oppressive/over class, his viewpoint is corrupted and invalid. By the way, this is the bread and butter of what they teach to kids in the soft majors in university nowadays. [1] http://www.arts.uwaterloo.ca/~kwesthue/regiftedxmas12.html

It's a shame that love and compassion has indeed left both the liberal arts educations as well as the worlds of business and entrepreneurship. But fear not, there is a coming Romantic Renaissance! Once again our children will turn to poetry, the arts and the love and celebration of their neighbors! The danger isn't in rationalism, or in relativism, or in whatever weird and distorted man-made system of thought is de r…

I am seriously trying to figure out if you are trolling or not. I mean, there's something to what you're saying here. Just that you've picked the weirdest-ass venue for it. You're not supposed to give a shit about your fellow human being if he or she is (imputatively) genetically incapable of or unwilling to perform the same feats of achievement as you.

Re: Silicon Valley Isn’t a Meritocracy

#170

Post by wonderzombie »

freefrancisco wrote: post #114
sp332 wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SV believes so strongly that it's meritocratic, that every successful person believes they deserve it. That's a problem.

Why is that a problem? Because someone who can say with moral certainty "this is my money, I earned" is not an easy mark for the sort of people who produce nothing but demand an equal share of the work of others? Because they won't subscribe to the ridiculous notion that there is no virtue in creating wealth but only virtue in giving it away? Maybe that is precisely why those who produce nothing hate the concept of m…

You begin from the premise that everyone who believes they have earned their money is correct. This is why the phrase "born on third base, think they hit a triple" was born.

It's fine if your premise is that people who have money deserve it a priori. But let's be honest. A great many haven't worked orders of magnitude harder despite orders of magnitude greater wealth. A great many are not themselves (but for their wealth) orders of magnitude inherently more valuable to society than everyone who has less.

Post reply on HN