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

Diversity and Startups

blog.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 218 posts

Re: Diversity and Startups

#161

Post by kika »

shanacarp wrote: post #157
kika wrote: post #39

Let's say I have a magic wand which will make all -isms go away in one waving. I waved, -isms went away and now what? Where do I hire skilled black female CoffeeScript developers? How many of them do actually exist? I'm insider/outsider - I live in the US now, in Bay Area, but I went to school in the country which doesn't even exist anymore, while my daughter goes to the one of the best middle schools around here. An…

I was that girl. You were my mother in a lot of ways (my mom is a programmer) the problem becomes more endemic in high school and then college where you have to start becoming a woman. Programming in a startup is not a great choice for peak fertility (where I am at...thankfully I consciously only want one kid, so I have time to delay)

I'm dad, not mom (though mom shares my concern) :-)

You're saying "start becoming a woman" as it contradicts being an "IT person", whatever that means, programmer, sysadmin, etc. Why? I want my daughter to become a woman (as much as my wife is a woman, and oh boy, she is. While being a an executive director of a science foundation). But I also want her to become whoever she wants to become professionally, programmer, designer, digital artist, VFX guru, whatever.

I can understand fertility and startup, but statistically, majority of "IT people" work for established companies, not startups. Enjoying all these extended maternity leaves, good health benefits plans, etc.

Re: Diversity and Startups

#162

Post by astrange »

runako wrote: post #131
staunch wrote: post #41

What about class? Ivy League Parents -> Private School -> SAT tutoring -> Ivy League College -> Investment by Ivy League VC -> Acquired by Ivy League Tech Company vs Poor parents -> Shitty Public School -> High School Drop Out -> Programmer at Ivy League Tech Company (maybe) There's a reason most of the big tech companies are from Ivy League graduates. And you can't ignore how many successful startups only happened b…

This argument dodges the thrust of Sam's essay, which centered on gender disparities. Your argument doesn't work for gender disparities. For example, MIT is ~46% female. Stanford is 47% female. (I won't be pedantic about the Ivy League thing.) These numbers look absolutely nothing like the small end of the VC funnel.

Do you know which schools those numbers are from?

(That doesn't really affect your chance of startup success, but surely it affects your inclination to go into one.)

Re: Diversity and Startups

#163

Post by potatolicious »

tzs wrote: post #40
harryh wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's the evidence that sexism is a more tractable problem than racism? Just curious...

If someone doesn't want to consider women for a job, it probably means that they think women have some inherent unsuitableness for that particular job. They aren't aggressive enough for sales, or don't have the upper body strength for landscaping, or some such. They don't mind hiring women for jobs that they think women can do (secretary). They probably have women friends, date or marry women, and so on. If someone d…

> "They don't want black people around for any job."

This is observably false. In American culture there are many jobs are perceived to be "for" blacks, and jobs that are perceived to be "for" hispanics.

Racism and sexism isn't as different as you seem to think it is. In the modern context (i.e., not guys in hoods hanging you from a tree) it is all about perception and opposing when races/genders stray from their "place" in society.

This is even observable in Asians, who are disproportionately highly employed in tech, but represents but a tiny proportion of leadership positions. Clearly someone thinks they're good for grunt work, but not suited to lead.

This is why people object against even positive stereotyping of races, because ultimately the bulk of the racism we deal with today isn't the foaming-at-the-mouth homicidal-rage type of racism, it's more casual and has everything to do with perceptions of what a race should, and shouldn't, be doing in society. Positive and negative stereotypes both contribute to pigeonholing people into their races.

Try talking to an Asian artist about this. "Positive" stereotypes of being mathematical, analytical, and traditionalist are actively harming people who don't fit the description and are trying to work jobs outside of their racial stereotypes.

Re: Diversity and Startups

#164

Post by streptomycin »

gizmo wrote: post #158
streptomycin wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can Google for academic literature. I provided some pretty comprehensive citations in my last post. Or you can just ignore the world around you and not be troubled by the problems minorities are facing. Hey, did you know that the unemployment rate is higher for blacks than whites? Does citing that statistic also make me a bigot? Does it make you feel better to ignore that problem too?

It doesn't make sense to do research on race and IQ. Except for people who are looking for scientific sounding reasons to legitimize their age-old racist prejudices. So to be clear: there is no serious debate about race and IQ to be had. There are no insights to be gained from Race-IQ research. I don't believe -- not for a second -- that a discussion about race and IQ helps minorities. The idea that we have to engage…

I don't see why it makes sense to ignore certain areas of racial disparity. If the racial IQ gap can be closed by various means, we should try to do it. Refusing to acknowledge that a disparity exists (not referring to you, but to people like the other guy who replied to me) doesn't help solve anything.

I could replace "IQ" with various other metrics like "SAT scores" or "high school graduation rates" or whatever, since they all correlate to some degree. Do you think that would do a better job of getting my point across? People seem to really dislike IQ tests.

Re: Diversity and Startups

#165

Post by Dewie »

streptomycin wrote: post #145
NaitJones wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That settles it, everything googled on the internet must be true, especially when they comport with your bigoted view of the world. I mean, I read on the internet that black people were 2/3 human somewhere, must be true.

You can Google for academic literature. I provided some pretty comprehensive citations in my last post. Or you can just ignore the world around you and not be troubled by the problems minorities are facing. Hey, did you know that the unemployment rate is higher for blacks than whites? Does citing that statistic also make me a bigot? Does it make you feel better to ignore that problem too?

What makes a person a bigot in people's eyes in these cases is to bring up IQ, a measurement that has a lot of connotations to innate ability. Bringing up lack of innate ability in the context of race will quickly get one labeled a racist. Now, that might be unfair and rash, and people may have a misconception of what IQ is. But the rules are pretty simple: don't allude to things that have connotations to innate ability, and you will at least have dodged the biggest bullet.

If you had not brought up IQ, and instead educational opportunities and such, there would have been no controversy. Yes, black people are in worse position than white people when it comes to education - this is very uncontroversial. No need to bring up things like IQ in order to make that point.

Re: Diversity and Startups

#166

Post by potatolicious »

lacus wrote: post #115

YC is starting to take a lot of the right steps. I know for me personally, as a female founder, my attitude has changed a lot in the past 6-8 months (from "I guess I'll keep reading HN & essays because I don't want to miss out on interesting content... but I don't feel good about it, and I'd definitely never apply" -- to now being able to be an unequivocal fan, attending Startup School, etc.). Honestly, any effort at…

> "e.g., that other industries are doing worse than tech on gender issues. (Like who? Who's doing worse, specifically?"

Probably no one, or at least no industry of comparable size.

But knowing HN, if Sam made an absolute statement like "we are the worst in diversity", the HN crew will spend the entire ensuing commentary self-importantly arguing whether or not we are literally the worst.

That's a conversation best avoided, as it is entirely irrelevant to the point being made, but this community is fucking pedantic like that when their egos are being challenged.

Re: Diversity and Startups

#167

Post by seanflyon »

morgante wrote: post #42
jfc wrote: post #30

On some level, the tech world isn't living up to its own principles, as it relates to diversity and inclusion (D&I). Many seem to view D&I as being somewhat external to the tech space--it's an issue that other industries have been discussing and is becoming more prominent in tech. I would posit that the underlying principles of the tech world share a number of core values with D&I. Think about the open source softwar…

I wholeheartedly agree, yet certain people continually attach open source as somehow being the worst of our industry. Just because it requires people be passionate enough about development to do it in their free time.

I don't think I've ever met anyone who thinks open source shouldn't exist. I know quite a few people who don't want to open source everything they make.

Re: Diversity and Startups

#168

Post by seanflyon »

tptacek wrote: post #155
shawndrost wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your question was, "Why is competition a diversity problem?" The answer is "science indicates that competition motivates genders differently". The fact that our industry is deeply, irretrievably competitive is (imho) part of why it's deeply, irretrievably gender-skewed. (Caveats: you're right that women perform in the industry just fine. Also, many women are motivated and successful in competitive environments, and t…

No. The industry must be competitive. Companies compete in the market. People must stop promoting the fiction that women are poor competitors. That's a stereotype that just happens to be awfully convenient for male entrepreneurs.

While companies must compete to exist, I don't think that requires work environment or culture to be competitive in nature. Interactions between coworkers should be fundamentally cooperative and cooperation between companies (such as contribution to open source projects) can also benefit all involved. The tech industry is not a zero sum game.

Re: Diversity and Startups

#169

Post by designNERD »

thrownaway999 wrote: post #109

Could someone convince me why I should care about the gonads and skin color of the people writing code for me? Does anybody really think YC's performance would be better if their founder classes looked like a diversity picture from a college recruiting brochure?

You don't understand the importance of having different perspectives represented when you are making products and services for everyone?

Seems pretty simple to me.

Re: Diversity and Startups

#170

Post by tptacek »

seanflyon wrote: post #168
tptacek wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. The industry must be competitive. Companies compete in the market. People must stop promoting the fiction that women are poor competitors. That's a stereotype that just happens to be awfully convenient for male entrepreneurs.

While companies must compete to exist, I don't think that requires work environment or culture to be competitive in nature. Interactions between coworkers should be fundamentally cooperative and cooperation between companies (such as contribution to open source projects) can also benefit all involved. The tech industry is not a zero sum game.

If you're reading "competition" as a license to be an asshole to team members, then we agree, but think that point is banal.

Otherwise, I reject this argument. I see it as mostly waving off gender concerns. "Let's not address our broken perceptions about the capabilities of women, but instead think about how we can rework the entire fabric of the industry." I'm sure everyone's going to get right on that.

Post reply on HN