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

Female Founders

paulgraham.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

561–570 of 634 posts

Re: Female Founders

#561

Post by Crake »

reallyseriously wrote: post #231
jl wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This comment makes me so angry that it is difficult to remain calm, but I will try. You have this wrong. All three of us are in charge of so much more than you suggest here. We all participate in investment decisions and advise the companies on many different matters-- including business strategy. Since we started YC, there has not been one important decision we've made that I have not been a part of.

"there has not been one important decision we've made that I have not been a part of." Careful, you're not fitting the narrative these people want believe. But seriously, disappointed pg even wrote this. Just engaging with these people is losing. http://youtu.be/VXbDJ3uBl9M?t=1h26m36s

The sad thing is that it's very likely that sjws will embark on some sort of crusade against her for not fitting into their worldview. Anyone who exists in a way counter to their ideology is marked an enemy to be destroyed in the most high school styled manner possible. Ironic, considering that they claim that their goal is to further the cause of women in tech, etc.

Re: Female Founders

#562

Post by jacobtracey »

wpietri wrote: post #544
theorique wrote: post #531

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Asians throw the "white privilege" theory for a loop, because they face the same challenges as other people of color, and yet still manage to succeed admirably. Victim-lovers don't like them for that very reason, because they don't play very good racial victims - they are too busy succeeding.

Not at all. That one group has privilege doesn't mean no other group can. Here, for example, is a programmer talking about how he was privileged for looking like an Asian guy: http://pgbovine.net/tech-privilege.htm White privilege by the way, isn't a theory. It's a fact. E.g.: http://www.nber.org/papers/w9873 Or, more entertainingly: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TG4f9zR5yzY

This collectivism grouping of people with 'privilege' is so bogus it's astounding that people follow it so blindly.

Have you ever considered the possibility that people can judge other people based on their individual merits, not by the actions/inactions of people with the same colour of their skin or gender?

Furthermore, you quote one white paper to prove that white privilege is fact - how does that paper prove anything is factual?

Re: Female Founders

#563

Post by jacobtracey »

moocowduckquack wrote: post #530
pbhjpbhj wrote: post #520

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No derailment intended - I was genuinely shocked. That may have made my response more emotional that it should have been.

Well, your language does not read as being genuine. To be frank, it reads like someone faking caring for rhetorical effect in order to to cause an argument. I currently do not believe that you are arguing in good faith.

Your language does not read as being genuine. To be frank, it reads like someone trying to derail the discussion by critiquing someone else's tone. I currently do not believe that you are arguing in good faith.

Do you see how stupid you sound?

Re: Female Founders

#564

Post by Crake »

ivansavz wrote: post #341

I've been conducting an informal survey amongst coder friends testing the hypothesis: Childhood experience playing with LEGO blocks is a predictor of a person's affinity towards programming as an adult. I think "building things with code" is very similar to "building things with LEGOs" so I wonder to what extent other people see programming the same way and whether "LEGO experience" could be a factor in the developer…

I actually hate Lego. The only Lego thing I ever wanted was Mindstorm.

I did have a crazy amount of K'nex, though, and built all sorts of race cars, roller coasters, bridges I could put between two chairs and make an adult sit on, etc. I still like K'nex a lot more than Lego--you can do many more things, and with far fewer pieces.

Re: Female Founders

#565

Post by mcv »

debacle wrote: post #268
parfe wrote: post #26

I find myself disappointed by this blog post. The second paragraph amounts to a sexist version of "I'm not racist! I have black friends!" Then he follows up with statistics comparing YC to the general VC market. Fine, you do better than most. However, not the worst does not mean not bad. He comes closest to saying anything of substance with the paragraph: So how would you cause there to be more female programmers? Th…

Men learn at a certain point that we are not, in fact, women. We have different values, priorities, and hormones than women, and given the same scenarios we're likely to come to a different conclusion than a woman. So why would Paul try and talk from his zero years of experience as a woman and explain how to get more women in coding? Why not simply state "Please stop calling me a sexist, I don't like it, here's some…

> We have different values, priorities, and hormones than women, and given the same scenarios we're likely to come to a different conclusion than a woman.

We have different hormones, definitely. But different values and priorities? Different conclusions? I (a man) have very different values and priorities from quite a lot of men. Men often come to different conclusions than other men.

This is not a fundamental men vs women difference. People are different. Men and women are both people.

Re: Female Founders

#566

Post by moocowduckquack »

jacobtracey wrote: post #563
moocowduckquack wrote: post #530

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, your language does not read as being genuine. To be frank, it reads like someone faking caring for rhetorical effect in order to to cause an argument. I currently do not believe that you are arguing in good faith.

Your language does not read as being genuine. To be frank, it reads like someone trying to derail the discussion by critiquing someone else's tone. I currently do not believe that you are arguing in good faith. Do you see how stupid you sound?

Oh yes, he's shocked, he's genuinely shocked, he finds it all such a shame.

I mean, really.

People claiming outrage and shock at having just discovered the existence of affirmative action in a country that practiced aparthied in some parts within living memory are either outstandingly ignorant, stupid, or lying through their teeth.

Re: Female Founders

#567

Post by A_COMPUTER »

wpietri wrote: post #544
theorique wrote: post #531

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Asians throw the "white privilege" theory for a loop, because they face the same challenges as other people of color, and yet still manage to succeed admirably. Victim-lovers don't like them for that very reason, because they don't play very good racial victims - they are too busy succeeding.

Not at all. That one group has privilege doesn't mean no other group can. Here, for example, is a programmer talking about how he was privileged for looking like an Asian guy: http://pgbovine.net/tech-privilege.htm White privilege by the way, isn't a theory. It's a fact. E.g.: http://www.nber.org/papers/w9873 Or, more entertainingly: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TG4f9zR5yzY

He just hasn't mastered the social justice narrative. He is being oppressed by the white stereotype that Asians are smart.

Re: Female Founders

#568

Post by wpietri »

Crake wrote: post #549
aaren wrote: post #483

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the link to scalzi [1] - "Straight White Male: The Lowest Difficulty Setting There Is". It was a really good read. [1]: http://whatever.scalzi.com/2012/05/15/straight-white-male-th...

I'm not a SWM and I think this stupid article has done a lot to damage the cause of equality. It is tactically, morally, and ethically stupid. I wish people would stop linking it, but sjws gonna sjw, I guess. Getting an angry response from disadvantaged people is more entertaining than doing the dull dreary or the high risk scary work of actually helping underprivileged succeed. Ugh.

Could you explain what harm you think this article has done, and which disadvantage people are providing the angry response?

Re: Female Founders

#569

Post by wpietri »

jacobtracey wrote: post #562
wpietri wrote: post #544

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not at all. That one group has privilege doesn't mean no other group can. Here, for example, is a programmer talking about how he was privileged for looking like an Asian guy: http://pgbovine.net/tech-privilege.htm White privilege by the way, isn't a theory. It's a fact. E.g.: http://www.nber.org/papers/w9873 Or, more entertainingly: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TG4f9zR5yzY

This collectivism grouping of people with 'privilege' is so bogus it's astounding that people follow it so blindly. Have you ever considered the possibility that people can judge other people based on their individual merits, not by the actions/inactions of people with the same colour of their skin or gender? Furthermore, you quote one white paper to prove that white privilege is fact - how does that paper prove anyt…

If a lot of people see something you don't, they could all be deluded. Or you could just be missing something. Also, people aren't going to take you very seriously if you run around accusing them of being blind. Even when you're right.

Actually, there's a lot of research that shows that the default condition of humankind is not to judge other people based on their individual merits. And that probably includes you. Try some of these on for size: https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/

That paper proves that just having a name that people perceive as white gives you a substantial advantage in job searches. That is one small aspect of white privilege. There are a raft of studies like this. That's just one that stuck in my head.

Re: Female Founders

#570

Post by jacobtracey »

moocowduckquack wrote: post #566
jacobtracey wrote: post #563

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your language does not read as being genuine. To be frank, it reads like someone trying to derail the discussion by critiquing someone else's tone. I currently do not believe that you are arguing in good faith. Do you see how stupid you sound?

Oh yes, he's shocked, he's genuinely shocked, he finds it all such a shame. I mean, really. People claiming outrage and shock at having just discovered the existence of affirmative action in a country that practiced aparthied in some parts within living memory are either outstandingly ignorant, stupid, or lying through their teeth.

You've added nothing but questioning his character and then a string of baseless insults.

I'm sure if you had anything of value to say you'd have said it by now, so I'm just gonna let this one go.

Post reply on HN