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

The Myth of the Non-Technical Startup Employee

modelviewculture.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 258 posts

Re: The Myth of the Non-Technical Startup Employee

#91

Post by melindajb »

vezzy-fnord wrote: post #82
melindajb wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

cry me a river. you don't get to whine about this stuff, when you're the party in power. Work to better it, stop whining, that's what those people tell everyone else.

Your post history shows that you are either a good troll or a deluded radical that is the living embodiment of every Tumblr feminist trope. What motivates this toxic revanchist mindset that every single white man has homogenous and equally distributed power, simply due to being part of a group due to their skin color? This type of identity politics is no different than Luce Irigaray claiming E = mc^2 is a "sexed equa…

Nice try, fake name. I'm none of those things. I said none of these things. But your toxic, anonymous rage and sweeping generalizations? Well, that's pretty much the definition of sociopathy. Way to keep Hacker News productive and constructive!

Re: The Myth of the Non-Technical Startup Employee

#92

Post by adrianm »

frandroid wrote: post #88
adrianm wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm inclined to agree with much of what you said, but I don't think sexism is always at fault here. If I were that person who struck up a conversation with your fiance, I know I would personally find it difficult to make the "first move" in initiating a conversation with you. Is it because I'm sexist? No! I'm not a very extroverted or social person and I find it personally very difficult to make initial contact with…

You're not sexist, but you have less problems breaking the ice with men than women...

I don't understand what you're implying here, I'm afraid.

Re: The Myth of the Non-Technical Startup Employee

#93

Post by melindajb »

wpietri wrote: post #75
jv22222 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My thought is that it's not because they mean to be rude. It's because they pattern match. I've noticed when folks see the same pattern over and over it's difficult to see outside it. My friends wife is an F16 fighter pilot. I was surprised to find that out. Truth is I should not have been surprised, but it went against the patterns I'm used to seeing. I wonder if that's at play here?

> My thought is that it's not because they mean to be rude. It's because they pattern match. I've noticed when folks see the same pattern over and over it's difficult to see outside it. Most rude people don't mean to be rude. They're just thoughtless. That doesn't make their behavior less rude. For example, the zillion people who, upon learning I'm a computer guy, bust out their computer questions and put me on the s…

The pattern matching itself isn't the problem, indeed. It's the apparent lack of some men, usually white men to override it and take a more charitable view of their fellow human beings.

For some reason those same men cry out for "rational discussion" unless it's about their own behavior, of course. They can somehow override most of their animal instincts to steal, fight, or fuck indiscriminately, but can't somehow find a way to overcome thinking a woman at a trade show booth can't possibly be an engineer.

So we're saying, either the person can overcome that thinking or they can't.

If they can, but choose not to, they're deliberately discriminatory.

If they can't overcome that thinking, we might want to have them institutionalized for anti social behavior, because what other animal instincts are they not able to overcome?

Re: The Myth of the Non-Technical Startup Employee

#94

Post by mcantelon »

zorpner wrote: post #66
jv22222 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the post you linked to... "So pattern recognition is a useless heuristic made up by a group of rich white men as a way to quantify something" If that statement isn't racist, biased, and, well, just quite mean really, then I'm not sure what is.

I always hesitate to post this on HN, because it almost never goes well, but here it is: Racism (sexism/classism/etc) is not about race (sex/class/etc). It's about power. For this reason alone (let alone all the other good ones), there is no symmetry in these biases (e.g. the false equivalence of misogyny and misandry).

>Racism (sexism/classism/etc) is not about race

The popular, and dictionary, definition of "racism" is "hatred or intolerance of another race or other races".

Re: The Myth of the Non-Technical Startup Employee

#95

Post by melindajb »

melindajb wrote: post #83
thibauts wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not everybody it out to hurt you, discriminate, or hate you. That being said, immediate reaction / assumptions cannot be treated the same way as thoughtful examination. At all.

Your assumption that I said that says far more about you than it does me. People who shrug and claim pattern matching instead of being rational and overriding their immediate response are discriminating in a way I find offensive. I believe that is what you are saying in your second paragraph. Our humanity is the supposed to be the part of our brains that allows us to override animal instincts to fight, fuck, steal, a…

thanks for the downvote! I wear it as a badge of honor.

Re: The Myth of the Non-Technical Startup Employee

#97

Post by zorpner »

vezzy-fnord wrote: post #77
zorpner wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always hesitate to post this on HN, because it almost never goes well, but here it is: Racism (sexism/classism/etc) is not about race (sex/class/etc). It's about power. For this reason alone (let alone all the other good ones), there is no symmetry in these biases (e.g. the false equivalence of misogyny and misandry).

This is a sly redefinition of racism that largely fails to withstand scrutiny: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Prejudice_plus_power

From that link: "It is important to push for the understanding that racism is 'prejudice plus power' and therefore people of color cannot be racist against whites in the United States. People of color can be prejudiced against whites but clearly do not have the power as a group to enforce that prejudice."

That's pretty much exactly the case! Thanks for the great quote.

Re: The Myth of the Non-Technical Startup Employee

#99

Post by melindajb »

mrbtie wrote: post #90
melindajb wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

cry me a river. you don't get to whine about this stuff, when you're the party in power. Work to better it, stop whining, that's what those people tell everyone else.

"you don't get to whine about this stuff, when you're the party in power" ROFLOL You must think of yourself as some sort of vigilante, right?

Nope, I'm a normal person who gets upset occasionally, and most of the time doesn't bother. I've seen a lot of this for many, many years, and sometimes, I just feel the need to get involved. Then I get back to work. I wish I was a vigilante, then I could be like Chuck Norris. Who is awesome.

Re: The Myth of the Non-Technical Startup Employee

#100

Post by CGudapati »

hobs wrote: post #44
theorique wrote: post #6

From the VBScript and complex spreadsheet wrangling required to perform analysis of key organizational metrics to mastery of numerous different specialized softwares and systems in order to perform basic functions of the job ranging from accounting to people operations, non-technical employees must have a bevy of technical skills at the ready every single day. In fact, I had to code a sample app using the company’s A…

That was my immediate thought, irregardless of the gender argument. I work with plenty of non-technical ops people, ALL of them REGARDLESS of intelligence, can not code out of a wet paper bag. I have at various points shown them all how to use basic excel formulas and they still use calculators that would not look out of place in a grade school. Are they good at what they do? Yes. Does what they do require that type…

Not to be that guy but regardless is the correct form. Irregardless is considered as non-standard or incorrect. But if you do know this, please don't mind this nitpick.
Post reply on HN