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

What the Hell Is Up with Dilbert?

meghanboilard.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 416 posts

Re: What the Hell Is Up with Dilbert?

#271

Post by oneoff786 »

Ekaros wrote: post #181
scifibestfi wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's an active job opening from a University in Canada, seeking a Research Chair in Experimental Physics. This stuff is everywhere. Even in science. "Candidates must be from one or more of the following equity-seeking groups to apply: women, persons with disabilities, Indigenous peoples, and racialized groups" https://www.universityaffairs.ca/search-job/?job_id=58317

Why don't they target income? Or wealth. Would just seem fair that candidate must have less than median wage or net wealth in past let's say 3 years.

Socioeconomic diversity is almost certainly the best way to improve societal outcomes. But it’s hard to track and is less outwardly visible.

Re: What the Hell Is Up with Dilbert?

#273

Post by 78124781 »

dghlsakjg wrote: post #119
AinderS wrote: post #4

Simple. Workplace complaints and management priorities have changed, and Dilbert followed. When Dilbert started, the government wasn't yet training employees how to "interrupt whiteness" [1], or Coca-Cola how to "be less white" [2], or Cigna simply forbidding hiring whites [3], nor did academia require mandatory diversity pledges for new hires and promotions [4]. Dilbert is doing what we are told art is supposed to d…

I want to call out your sources. City Journal is a propaganda outlet (George Soros conspiracy takes should not lead your top stories if you want credibility), The Washington Examiner is also openly biased and prints bullshit, and the story you mentioned has two unproven, unattributed, anecdotes. Newsweek... is Newsweek. The WSJ opinion section is a bad place to look for unbiased facts, as would be the NYT opinion sec…

I would recommend taking a moment to read the actual articles instead of dismissing the sources offhand. The City Journal article has links to the actual documents in question. The Washington Examiner has screenshots of the actual training. The WSJ has links to the actual politically biased and ideologically narrow hiring criteria being used. You can complain about the bias of these sources (just like other people do CNN, MSNBC, NYTimes, etc.), but take a look at the actual documents here.

If you'd like more reliable sources, here you go: https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.1418878112 Experimental evidence for favoring hiring women over men in academia https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/21565503.2018.14... Strong evidence for preference for hiring minority candidates in academia https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2019/12/31/life-science-jobs-... (with links to actual documents included revealing clear use of DEI statements to cull huge swaths of applications) https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/minority-professor-deni... How DEI statements are used to discriminate against researchers on grants https://www.thefire.org/fire-calls-on-uc-santa-cruz-to-drop-... More schools using DEI as a first cut in hiring

Maybe this is different in some companies, but from what I understand it seems to be happening at the same pace as well.

Re: What the Hell Is Up with Dilbert?

#274

Post by fknorangesite »

rayiner wrote: post #97

> Dave is hired merely as an act of workplace tokenism before wrapping up with what appears to be an attempt at a thinly-veiled transphobic joke. That particular strip is actually a hilarious joke that is probably lost on people who have never been in the position of being the minority who isn’t meeting expectations for “adding diversity.” It’s not directed to trans people at all, but rather pokes fun at some people’…

No post body was provided.

Re: What the Hell Is Up with Dilbert?

#275

Post by cjbgkagh »

ravenstine wrote: post #11
AinderS wrote: post #4

Simple. Workplace complaints and management priorities have changed, and Dilbert followed. When Dilbert started, the government wasn't yet training employees how to "interrupt whiteness" [1], or Coca-Cola how to "be less white" [2], or Cigna simply forbidding hiring whites [3], nor did academia require mandatory diversity pledges for new hires and promotions [4]. Dilbert is doing what we are told art is supposed to d…

It really makes me wonder what the common experience is for others not just in tech but Corporate America in general. I myself have run into anti-white and anti-male phenomena, unconscious bias pseudoscience training, diversity pledges, and so on, as have now others in my peer group. Dilbert's commentary has so far been entirely appropriate based on my experience, hence it's puzzling to me when people think there's s…

Two projects I was trying to start at a FANG company were cancelled during inception because they were unlikely to meet diversity quotas. Not enough women, hispanics and african americans. My sub-field is so dominated by men that it would have been impossible to meet the quota without drastically lowering standards to the point the project wouldn't be viable anyway. It was a no-win situation and one of the main reasons I had to leave the FANG company and start my own small company.

Fortunately for me my competition are multi-nationals and they all went through the same diversity quota overhaul. I think their management just wanted more compliant cheaper devs. Big companies have a lot of inertia but they got so inefficient that they're now taking forever to come out with new tech. I'm slowly stealing their customers.

Re: What the Hell Is Up with Dilbert?

#276

Post by a_shovel »

mmmpop wrote: post #265
a_shovel wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the description of the second comic shown in the article: > ... Dave threatens to report PHB (Pointy-Haired Boss) to the company’s HR department should he misgender the new engineer. It is then implied that Dave has switched preferred pronouns with the intent of catching cohorts in a trap rather than out of any true reflection of self. There are at least a couple of things wrong with this, in my view. Do you int…

Quoted post unavailable.

You're referencing a bunch of stuff that doesn't have anything to do with either of our comments. Are you sure you replied to the right comment?

Re: What the Hell Is Up with Dilbert?

#277

Post by scifibestfi »

ZeroGravitas wrote: post #243
scifibestfi wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But the fact remains that women and minorities are at a significant disadvantage when it comes to just about all aspects of life How does that square with the fact that the homeless and prison populations are mostly men? And men do the most dangerous jobs? And most social programs are aimed at women? And divorce favors women? And men die younger? And women outnumber men in college?

Nice dodge of 'minorities', some of whom are men, and are incarcerated at a higher rate (as much as 5x higher).

Minorities aren't a monolith either. For example, Asians are incarcerated at a lower rate than whites and you can figure out why this is by examining crime statistics.

Re: What the Hell Is Up with Dilbert?

#278

Post by 78124781 »

scifibestfi wrote: post #183
CabSauce wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can cherry-pick examples of bad communication and bad policies all you want. But the fact remains that women and minorities are at a significant disadvantage when it comes to just about all aspects of life. The 'woke' problem pales in comparison to the actual problem. Complaining about things going too far isn't a good look when there are real, systemic issues remaining.

> But the fact remains that women and minorities are at a significant disadvantage when it comes to just about all aspects of life How does that square with the fact that the homeless and prison populations are mostly men? And men do the most dangerous jobs? And most social programs are aimed at women? And divorce favors women? And men die younger? And women outnumber men in college?

Plus the highest suicide rate in the US by far comes from white men: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7108a7.htm

And women not only outnumber men in college, but that divide is increasing rapidly and now includes most higher degrees as well: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/23/business/dealbook/women-c...

Re: What the Hell Is Up with Dilbert?

#279

Post by thiht »

dariusj18 wrote: post #156

The token hire strip would be funny if it wasn't an actual reflection of the strip and it's lack of diversity (and the obvious reticence of the creator to consider diversity as important). What would have been a smarter and less controversial move would be to subtly introduce people of color over time, then add a strip about a diversity hire, with the other characters visibly getting ticked off.

Maybe his workplace is not diverse and he wants to reflect that. My workplace is not diverse.

And I also don’t believe in the importance of diversity, there’s nothing wrong with that. That doesn’t mean I’m against diversity nor that I don’t enjoy it.

Re: What the Hell Is Up with Dilbert?

#280

Post by prepend »

SeanLuke wrote: post #8
h2odragon wrote: post #2

Remember "Doonesbury." Might've been funny once but degraded into political polemics for the last decade or more. Once you've got an audience the temptation to use their trust to persuade them of, well, anything; seems to be hard to resist. Moreso when you have opinions that others emphatically do not share. I can think of dozens of "liberal comics" that never tried to be funny, that were merely political propaganda…

> Might've been funny once but degraded into political polemics for the last decade or more. What are you talking about? Doonesbury has been a proudly, and heavily, political comic since the 1960s.

I started reading doonesbury in the 80s just because it was on the comics page. I never found it funny and didn’t get it. I’ve heard people describe that it was once funny way back in the day but was never able to confirm it.
Post reply on HN