31–40 of 190 posts
Maybe just a total coincidence, but the mid-80's is also the time when media and authorities started their witch hunt against hackers and the word "hacker" became equal to "criminal". Basically, in the mid-80's the predominant media image of computer engineers was either social outcast of criminal. Gee, wonder why women weren't attracted to that.
And men were, because...?
Maybe just a total coincidence, but the mid-80's is also the time when media and authorities started their witch hunt against hackers and the word "hacker" became equal to "criminal". Basically, in the mid-80's the predominant media image of computer engineers was either social outcast of criminal. Gee, wonder why women weren't attracted to that.
This argument seems to rest on the assumption that women are fundamentally more susceptible to decisions based on stereotypes than men are. Do you have any evidence both that this is the case, and that any measurable difference (if there is one) is significant enough to blame for this effect?
This same graph used in the article was extensively discussed on reddit 3 days ago. [1] I want to quote some of the comments, which I think is extremely important to this discussion. " The far simpler answer is that the 1970's "explosion" of women into the (purported) field of "computer science" was largely women obtaining degrees in (what were then "computer science" courses) the subfields of "Data Processing" and l…
The account that made that comment is a frequent poster in mens rights & friends subreddits, and probably should not be taken without a SUBSTANIAL grain of salt (particularly given the lack of any data to back it up)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The account that made that comment is a frequent poster in mens rights & friends subreddits, and probably should not be taken without a SUBSTANIAL grain of salt (particularly given the lack of any data to back it up)
I tend to agree that his comments should be taken with a grain of salt. I am curious if anyone here has a more definitive set of data.
Doesn't anecdotal evidence suggest that children quickly exceed their mentors (parents) when exposed to 1980s consumer hardware? (That hardware was deterministic--same key sequence means same result every time. You know, like video games from the same era.)
Being exceeded by your child can be a dramatic emotional event. Are the feelings that a father or mother experience different when the child is a little girl vs. a little boy?
This story makes a compelling case that women stopped programming because - 1. Computers started being sold as consumer products - 2. They were marketed almost exclusively to boys - 3. Boys played with computers and learned about them, while girls were made to feel that computers weren't for them - 3. Men showed up to college with more computer experience - 4. Women felt they must not be "naturally good" at computers…
Any suggestions from HN on how best to guide her interests?
Extra project? incentive?
For now, her interests are typical teenage - school clubs, facebook, youtube, tumblr, etc.
Maybe just a total coincidence, but the mid-80's is also the time when media and authorities started their witch hunt against hackers and the word "hacker" became equal to "criminal". Basically, in the mid-80's the predominant media image of computer engineers was either social outcast of criminal. Gee, wonder why women weren't attracted to that.
This argument seems to rest on the assumption that women are fundamentally more susceptible to decisions based on stereotypes than men are. Do you have any evidence both that this is the case, and that any measurable difference (if there is one) is significant enough to blame for this effect?
Men are usually the outliers. (See % of male prisoners)
Note that he also said "Maybe just a total coincidence".
This same graph used in the article was extensively discussed on reddit 3 days ago. [1] I want to quote some of the comments, which I think is extremely important to this discussion. " The far simpler answer is that the 1970's "explosion" of women into the (purported) field of "computer science" was largely women obtaining degrees in (what were then "computer science" courses) the subfields of "Data Processing" and l…
The views in that comment are completely unsubstantiated. There was no evidence presented that "data processing" was ever taught as part of or categorized as computer science. In fact, later comments debunk that viewpoint. Also worth noting that the person who wrote that subscribes to the Men Going Their Own Way movement [1] (his username is thrownaway_MGTOW), which while not an outright debunking of his claims, shou…
Although the "debunk" wasn't very clear. With some posters that also saying that their family members indeed obtained data entry degree in computer science
http://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/2joexk/what...
Hard to make a judgement call, but I think the truth is probably not as clear cut as NPR suggests
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The account that made that comment is a frequent poster in mens rights & friends subreddits, and probably should not be taken without a SUBSTANIAL grain of salt (particularly given the lack of any data to back it up)
Is that not ad hominem? Attack the content of his post, not the content of his character.