Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the bigger problem here is 50% for women. Mind blowing.
Why is that mind blowing?
To me, the "at least" qualifier makes it look pretty bad. So if they reached 75% it wouldn't be a diversity issue?
Twitter removed their diversity page some time between November 16, 2022 and now
31–40 of 92 posts
Re: Twitter removed their diversity page some time between November 16, 2022 and now
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why is that mind blowing?
Because the pool of male engineers is ~4-8x larger than female candidates, so hiring 50% women is intentionally hiring worse employees because of their genitals.
Isn't the interview process the same for each role regardless? How does the size of the pool matter?
Re: Twitter removed their diversity page some time between November 16, 2022 and now
#33Re: Twitter removed their diversity page some time between November 16, 2022 and now
#34Maybe they realized that 71% of Silicon Valley being foreign-born H1b visa holders isn’t really the best image for ‘diversity’? https://slate.com/technology/2022/11/meta-facebook-layoffs-h... Bonus: almost half of Meta employees are from Asia. Reminds me of a screenshot of WPengines ‘diversity’ pledge on their website that proceeded to state nearly 80% of their staff were female. They changed it not long after.
> Bonus: almost half of Meta employees are from Asia.
That seems low for a global company as around 60% of the global population is in Asia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_continents_and_contine...
Re: Twitter removed their diversity page some time between November 16, 2022 and now
#35Good. Hiring based on race is... racist.
No, this is bad. Because the whole point of a diversity program is to reduce hiring based on race[0].
If a business is, say, 100% white men, it's extremely unlikely for this to have happened purely by chance. Like, "all the fast molecules in a can of air moving to one side" levels of impossible. If you want to argue that the problem is education or qualifications instead of overt refusal to hire minorities, that's one thing[1], but that's not an argument against measuring the company's diversity at all. That's an argument against affirmative action policies.
As far as I'm concerned, deleting this page is the equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ear and shouting "LALALALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU" at the problem.
[0] Or sex, gender, class, caste, sexual orientation, etc...
[1] Though I will disagree vehemently with the idea that it's purely an education problem. The minorities are here, they just don't stick around because big tech treats them like garbage.
Re: Twitter removed their diversity page some time between November 16, 2022 and now
#36Re: Twitter removed their diversity page some time between November 16, 2022 and now
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
The 25% minorities seems trivial to hit with Asians/Indians and is probably naturally higher than that. But wow on the woman quota, I can’t imagine how easy they had to make those interviews to hit that number.
This is disgustingly sexist. Some of the brightest engineers I know are women. Get that attitude off this forum, it does not belong here.
Wrong.
Realistically assuming a 4-8x larger pool of potential male engineers, as well as assuming equal average skill among males and females, hiring 50% women is what's disgustingly sexist.
If 10 woman and 40 men apply and you hire 5 each based only on sex, you are sexually discriminating against the 35 other men some of whom are statistically highly likely to be better candidates than some of the 5 women hired.
Get your identity politics off this forum, it does not belong here.
Re: Twitter removed their diversity page some time between November 16, 2022 and now
#38Quoted post unavailable.
No post body was provided.
Re: Twitter removed their diversity page some time between November 16, 2022 and now
#39Maybe they realized that 71% of Silicon Valley being foreign-born H1b visa holders isn’t really the best image for ‘diversity’? https://slate.com/technology/2022/11/meta-facebook-layoffs-h... Bonus: almost half of Meta employees are from Asia. Reminds me of a screenshot of WPengines ‘diversity’ pledge on their website that proceeded to state nearly 80% of their staff were female. They changed it not long after.
It's interesting that they had to hire from abroad. Meanwhile Latine people are the least represented demographic. It's not just Trump and racism at the border. Racism against Latine is everywhere. And worse is how accepted it is.
Re: Twitter removed their diversity page some time between November 16, 2022 and now
#40Good. Hiring based on race is... racist.
No, this is bad. Because the whole point of a diversity program is to reduce hiring based on race[0]. If a business is, say, 100% white men, it's extremely unlikely for this to have happened purely by chance. Like, "all the fast molecules in a can of air moving to one side" levels of impossible. If you want to argue that the problem is education or qualifications instead of overt refusal to hire minorities, that's on…
The crucial piece you're missing is that the problem is further upstream. Most American commercial pilots are white men. Most job applicants are too.
Forcing airlines to hire people who are not qualified just to meet a quota is the absolute worst way to solve this problem. In fact, it exacerbates it. What do you think happens when you force employers to hire people who are unqualified, and those people are all women or minorities? Well, now you just might create a perception that women and minorities are inherently less capable. Obviously untrue. But let's fix the pipeline instead of mandating "equity".
We should also work towards accepting that people are different and they have different drives and passions in their life. I imagine most Hindu women do not aspire to being professional rappers, or construction workers, for example.