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

Google kills diversity hiring targets

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 300 posts

Re: Google kills diversity hiring targets

#261

Post by scarab92 »

MadcapJake wrote: post #259
bufferoverflow wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is Google going to avoid interviewing anyone from a HBCU now? Why won't they? It's not like black people can't be hired anymore. It's just they have to compete like everyone else without being treated like disabled people.

> It's just they have to compete like everyone else That's the whole point of DEI to ensure that *no one* is getting an unfair advantage because: - their name is white https://www.forbes.com/sites/janicegassam/2024/04/17/new-res... - recruitment is only occurring at certain places - or any other ways that bias can filter out perfectly good candidates DEI is not about picking lesser candidates to fill quotas, it's abo…

A big part of the unpopularity of DEI programs is the dishonesty.

We all know that these programs don't result in better candidates, and that standards are lowered, not raised, when they are introduced.

Just be honest about it and make the case for why you think lowering standards is a worthwhile sacrifice to accomodate people from diverse backgrounds.

Even better, make the case for why considering any of this is a companies responsiblity in the first place.

Re: Google kills diversity hiring targets

#262

Post by scarab92 »

AlotOfReading wrote: post #166
bufferoverflow wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is Google going to avoid interviewing anyone from a HBCU now? Why won't they? It's not like black people can't be hired anymore. It's just they have to compete like everyone else without being treated like disabled people.

Imagine that someone decides recruiting needs a budget cut and shrinks the travel budget a bit. Managers shift to local career fairs instead. No one notices the complete lack of bay area HBCUs and a couple years down the road the pipeline is filled with people from Stanford with internships and internal recommendations competing against people from HBCUs that don't have either of them. One of these populations will l…

Google should be free to do that if they want.

Companies shouldn't be expected to solve every problem in society, and certainly not social issues.

Re: Google kills diversity hiring targets

#263

Post by eastbound »

schmookeeg wrote: post #107
teractiveodular wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But what if the poor people have the wrong skin color?

...raise taxes on the households of whatever the "correct skin color" is until they qualify for these programs? Obvs. :) /s, I hope. :/

I don’t know. When Sweden reached 58% women in university, they stopped the gender equality programs. Why would you help men if everyone knows they are advantaged?

(Oh man, please answer, but we’re overdue for an overcorrection, and it might look as dangerous as 1934).

Re: Google kills diversity hiring targets

#264

Post by eastbound »

Gothmog69 wrote: post #87
like_any_other wrote: post #13

Well, they've already achieved diversity, haven't they? Whites were already under-represented at Google (and at 18/23 tech companies) back in 2017 [1]. If they've rolled over for anyone, it was for the Asian lobby, who is over-represented at 23/23 of those tech companies, and now won't be facing DEI pressures to reduce their numbers. [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20250127210140/https://informati...

sounds like we need a working definition of diversity? Usually it just means way less white people.

In France it’s forbidden to filter by race. Guess how they filter by criteria? Well the population under 25 is incredibly diverse so they don’t care about filtering, they just donate to everyone under 25. Can’t believe we gave up our land like this, they’re not even nice or thankful.

Re: Google kills diversity hiring targets

#265

Post by ChocolateGod »

SilverBirch wrote: post #243
ChocolateGod wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So why did companies adopt quotas? In theory if DEI was about being race, sex, gender, sexuality, age blind, it wouldn't be controversial. But companies went in hard with things such as quotas, and there's even cases in the courts at the moment where Red Hat/IBM supposedly awarded bonuses based on hiring managers fulfilling diversity quotas.

Of course its controversial either way. Let's assume for our purposes that DEI is purely about being race, sex, gender, sexuality, age blind (which we can absolutely argue about separately). It would absolutely be controversial because it's replacing a system that previously wasn't blind to those characteristics and therefore has a large constituency of people it favoured. If I'm a rich white kid from a good family w…

> controversial because it's replacing a system that previously wasn't blind to those characteristics

Was it though?

Or was it just a result of society and culture outside the companies control.

The idea behind DEI is as if a car crashes into another car because of an issue with the road, that leads to one car being more damaged than the other, the solution is to make sure the less damaged car has the same amount of damage, rather than fixing the road.

Re: Google kills diversity hiring targets

#266

Post by themaninthedark »

fzeroracer wrote: post #163
likeabatterycar wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is Google going to avoid interviewing anyone from a HBCU now? No, because that would obviously be racist. DEI would be favoring one candidate over another specifically due to immutable personal characteristics, not their qualifications for the job. The just thing would be students from HBCUs having a level playing field along with everyone else. It's no different than hiring managers selectively preferring graduate…

I mean, considering West Point Academy is closing clubs like the National Society of Black Engineers or the Japanese Forum Club due to the anti-DEI order [1] I think that should tell you everything you need to know about what this change signals. [1] https://time.com/7212911/west-point-disbands-cadet-clubs-aff...

>the Japanese Forum Club, which described itself as a place for promoting “understanding and appreciation of Japanese culture and language”;

Don't know why West Point thinks that is required by the anti-DEI order, maybe someone is going through and looking at anything with race or gender in the name and shutting it down?

If so, that would be on West Point.

Re: Google kills diversity hiring targets

#267

Post by Gud »

jjslocum3 wrote: post #234
leoqa wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the real metric should be childhood household income. That transcends race or gender and universally inhibits the child in almost every measurable way.

The real metric should be how good looking they are. That transcends household income, race, and gender. /sarc

Generally rich people are better looking, so it doesn't really hold up.

Re: Google kills diversity hiring targets

#268

Post by UncleMeat »

likeabatterycar wrote: post #149
strangeloops85 wrote: post #148

Independent of whether these goals are appropriate or not, these actions (and those of so many other companies) are just so predictably craven. These executive orders (and what "DEIA" exactly means or constitutes, legally speaking) have not been litigated or clarified yet. Is Google going to avoid interviewing anyone from a HBCU now? At least Costco seems to have a logical reason for what they do and stood by it.

> Is Google going to avoid interviewing anyone from a HBCU now? No, because that would obviously be racist. DEI would be favoring one candidate over another specifically due to immutable personal characteristics, not their qualifications for the job. The just thing would be students from HBCUs having a level playing field along with everyone else. It's no different than hiring managers selectively preferring graduate…

How do you feel about recruiting efforts at all-women's colleges? What if those were stopped?

Re: Google kills diversity hiring targets

#269

Post by UncleMeat »

bufferoverflow wrote: post #159
scblock wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You misunderstand what Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion is. It's not about favoring anyone despite qualifications and never has been. Using it as a pejorative in the way you are is how the right wants to use it, but it is also racist, sexist, and ablist. It doesn't reflect the purpose of the concept at all. In fact your description of "favoring one candidate over another specifically due to immutable personal charact…

> You misunderstand what Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion is. It's not about favoring anyone despite qualifications and never has been. Yes, it has. Look at the college admissions. The test score requirements for black students were way way lower than those for the Asian students in many universities and colleges. That's favoring people by their skin color. Which is illegal since at least 1964.

College admissions have (until very recently) operated under a different jurisprudence than businesses.

Re: Google kills diversity hiring targets

#270

Post by UncleMeat »

teractiveodular wrote: post #145
Quarrelsome wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You're assuming there is no genetic component whatsoever to human skills and interests Are you seriously suggesting that black people are genetically less predispositioned to program? Explain the evolutionary advantage to that please because that sounds absolutely absurd.

Here's a strawman: White people are more likely to diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders (ASD). If people with ASD are more likely to opt for CS degrees, by induction we'll have more white people in CS.

Accommodations for people with autism who might have different needs for things like noise levels or interviewing procedures would be a classic DEI effort.
Post reply on HN