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

Diversity and Inclusion at GitHub

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 246 posts

Re: Diversity and Inclusion at GitHub

#201

Post by 746F7475 »

zyxley wrote: post #20
guessmyname wrote: post #12

This blog post reads to me like the Pokemon motto "Gotta Catch 'Em All". Being non-american (I'm from a South American country) it is hard for me to understand the importance giving to these things associated to racism and sexism. The United States is the only place I have seen where people invest a considerable amount of time and resources just to put people from minor groups or specific genders in pedestals just to…

> The United States is the only place I have seen where people invest a considerable amount of time and resources just to put people from minor groups or specific genders in pedestals just to please other people. It's not "just to please other people"; it's to attempt to counteract the institutionalized discrimination against minorities that exists throughout the country. Studies have shown[1] that, for example, peop…

Well, if you are hiring a secretary and there are two applicants with minimal experience and same resume, but one is called Jane Smith and other is Shereesha Taulava, name does have meaning since you probably can only pronounce one of these names right just by reading them. So you are more likely to interview them first. And if you have a quota to send X amount of letters, then these easily pronounceable names do have advantage. Still I see no racism, people just naturally go through path of least resistance with these sort of things.

Re: Diversity and Inclusion at GitHub

#202

Post by [deleted] »

MaxfordAndSons wrote: post #199
alva wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but garden variety American anti-semitism is not of the systemic, historical nature that makes a random Jewish American more likely to be passed over for a job because of their name, or treated drastically differently by the average police officer, or less likely to have become engaged in tech earlier in life. Many people would find that highly offensive and ignorant. Why are you trying to diminish the struggles fa…

But you're still making the same false equivocation. A "large amount of societal discrimination" ≠ institutional racism. It's a subtle distinction, but once you grasp it you can see the need for affirmative action and understand that it's not just about helping certain groups deemed "trendy".

[deleted]

Re: Diversity and Inclusion at GitHub

#203

Post by [deleted] »

MaxfordAndSons wrote: post #199
alva wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but garden variety American anti-semitism is not of the systemic, historical nature that makes a random Jewish American more likely to be passed over for a job because of their name, or treated drastically differently by the average police officer, or less likely to have become engaged in tech earlier in life. Many people would find that highly offensive and ignorant. Why are you trying to diminish the struggles fa…

But you're still making the same false equivocation. A "large amount of societal discrimination" ≠ institutional racism. It's a subtle distinction, but once you grasp it you can see the need for affirmative action and understand that it's not just about helping certain groups deemed "trendy".

[deleted]

Re: Diversity and Inclusion at GitHub

#204

Post by [deleted] »

MaxfordAndSons wrote: post #199
alva wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but garden variety American anti-semitism is not of the systemic, historical nature that makes a random Jewish American more likely to be passed over for a job because of their name, or treated drastically differently by the average police officer, or less likely to have become engaged in tech earlier in life. Many people would find that highly offensive and ignorant. Why are you trying to diminish the struggles fa…

But you're still making the same false equivocation. A "large amount of societal discrimination" ≠ institutional racism. It's a subtle distinction, but once you grasp it you can see the need for affirmative action and understand that it's not just about helping certain groups deemed "trendy".

[deleted]

Re: Diversity and Inclusion at GitHub

#205

Post by rimantas »

balls187 wrote: post #130
dijit wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, it's fine that it's racist, because I as a white male have it so good? Seems odd to me mate, there are things that being white certainly doesn't buy, it's not a ticket to middle-class. Being cis doesn't make me any more worse at my job than being gay would, don't judge me on that merit it's bullshit. FWIW I grew up incredibly poor and my "advantage" in IT was that people don't care about your background. If I had…

> Seems odd to me mate, there are things that being white certainly doesn't buy, it's not a ticket to middle-class. Perhaps not. But there are things that being white does grant you: 1. Police won't hassle you for driving a nice car. 2. Police won't hassle you for walking in a nice neighborhood. 3. People won't report you as "suspicious looking" for wearing a hoodie and walking in a neighborhood. 4. Police won't be a…

6. Your own peets won't harass you for "acting white"?

Re: Diversity and Inclusion at GitHub

#206

Post by PlainsWight »

cb18 wrote: post #195
MaxfordAndSons wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Has anyone attempted to explain why all this "institutional racism" seems to be working to such great benefit for north-east Asians in the US, who consistently rank above the supposed "evil white oppressors" in various socio-economic metrics? Since others are picking apart your argument in the large, I'll just add this. Institutional racism, though it continues to manifest in the present, can only be fully understoo…

Since others are picking apart your argument in the large Ha! No one else has even evidenced reading the post, I applaud you for seeming to have at least read it. so they've had much less time to be dragged down by systemic racism. They're not being "dragged down" at all, they're being "pushed up." There is no reason to think that given enough time they will eventually be dragged down. There is not some race in the U…

If you're going to call out people for not reading your post, at least have the courage to answer my response to your initial post.

Re: Diversity and Inclusion at GitHub

#207

Post by cb18 »

braythwayt wrote: post #200
cb18 wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're taking observations(one of them isn't even a factual observation[0]) and then a priori assigning a cause, "systemic racism," to those observations. That is not how facts, or rational, coherent reasoning works. [0] Races aren't arrested at different rates for the same crimes, race percentage in victim reports match race percentage in arrests. Drug arrest rate appear to vary as the result of compound charges, i.…

Your entire argument is based on a false dichotomy. You say “There is no racism, everything can be explained by black people” and then try to demonstrate that black people have some problem or other. But this is like saying that a road cannot be unsafe, look, here are statistics showing that some of the people who drive are drunk. You trying to demonstrate that black people this or black people that in aggregate does…

When riding a bike, I think it is wise to judge the class "car drivers on Saturday night," different than the class "car drivers on Tuesday afternoon," because "car drivers on Saturday night" are more likely to be drunk.

I ignored all the stuff where you went off the rails and started making wacky accusations, or whatever, it wasn't particularly clear...

My only mention of blacks was in showing how the talking point of "arrested more often for the same crimes(drug possession)" doesn't hold up to scrutiny when you consider how often those drug crimes are occurring in combination with other more serious crimes. In that case it is perfectly reasonable to talk in aggregate, since that is what you were doing in relaying that faulty stat.

that does not in any way say that individuals are not being judged and incurring negative opportunities because of their being black.

Whether that is occurring and to what degree cannot be said. Even if it could, what do you want to do about it? You can't just re-education camp everyone until they meet your standards.

Human nature doesn't work that way. But maybe you can take solace in knowing that biases may present themselves not just about racial groups. Saturday night drivers may be judged differently than other days, men may be judged more suspiciously around small children than women, investments more likely to return money may be judged as more favorable places to put money.

This is clearly a personal issue for you. I think we agree that we both want the best for all people.

My feeling is that for a harmonious society with integrity, we need to ascribe to phenomena, causes for which there is clear evidence for a causal relationship.

If you want to ascribe "institutional racism" as the cause to certain phenomena, but the observation can be made that those same phenomena exist in environments without the institutions you are blaming, Mexican performance in Mexico vs the USA for example, then the "institutional racism" theory doesn't hold water.

But even without that avenue to negate, you would still need significant evidence to validate the "institutional racism" theory. You can't just say, "I've observed Phenomenon B, and I've theorized Cause A, so A must cause B."

Decrying "institutional racism" as this kind of ambiguous, universal menace doesn't help anybody. First you would need clear evidence of it. Then it wouldn't be ambiguous, then you could solve the problem. You can't solve ambiguous problems, they need to be specific.

If you can't even lay out clear unambiguous evidence for the problem you are trying solve, then how will you know when it is solved? What are you fighting for?

Re: Diversity and Inclusion at GitHub

#208

Post by erikpukinskis »

lr4444lr wrote: post #135
zyxley wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The United States is the only place I have seen where people invest a considerable amount of time and resources just to put people from minor groups or specific genders in pedestals just to please other people. It's not "just to please other people"; it's to attempt to counteract the institutionalized discrimination against minorities that exists throughout the country. Studies have shown[1] that, for example, peop…

> it's to attempt to counteract the institutionalized discrimination against minorities that exists throughout the country. No. The reason companies hire in this way is to defend against discrimination lawsuits. The Supreme Court already decided against the principle you're describing in the ruling of the Bakke case.

> The reason companies hire in this way is to defend against discrimination lawsuits.

That sounds like maybe a broader statement that you intended... Certainly not every company has that plan. Are you talking about a specific kind of company?

Re: Diversity and Inclusion at GitHub

#209

Post by [deleted] »

lr4444lr wrote: post #135
zyxley wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The United States is the only place I have seen where people invest a considerable amount of time and resources just to put people from minor groups or specific genders in pedestals just to please other people. It's not "just to please other people"; it's to attempt to counteract the institutionalized discrimination against minorities that exists throughout the country. Studies have shown[1] that, for example, peop…

> it's to attempt to counteract the institutionalized discrimination against minorities that exists throughout the country. No. The reason companies hire in this way is to defend against discrimination lawsuits. The Supreme Court already decided against the principle you're describing in the ruling of the Bakke case.

[deleted]

Re: Diversity and Inclusion at GitHub

#210

Post by millstone »

brbsix wrote: post #13

Ever since Zach Holman "left", it appears as though GitHub has been eaten away from the inside by intersectional feminism. There appear to be subversive efforts to turn tech companies into platforms for social justice. I can only imagine it must be really uncomfortable to work in this sort of environment.

GitHub is definitely focusing more on social justice than any company its size.

Maybe it pushes out some employees, but ultimately allows GitHub to hire from a larger pool of developers. They attract the best and succeed in the market. Diversity and a social justice focus is proven to make a company more successful, and historically marginalized groups are inspired by the GitHub leadership. A great outcome.

On the other hand, maybe it becomes a significant distraction from the business side. The "social impact team" increases its influence, and the culture becomes one of fear of saying the wrong thing or offending the wrong person. Employees leave, and are difficult to replace due to the negative reputation of the internal culture. The company fails.

Whatever the outcome, it's a great experiment and we're sure to learn something.

Post reply on HN