What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft • Hacker News Board

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#321

Post by peter422 » Tue, Oct 11, 2022, 7:37 PM UTC

BlargMcLarg wrote: post #309

fzeroracer wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And men care about both money and technical things much more than women Stop this. These arguments are not only making massive assumptions but they are historically and factually wrong. In the history of computing and computer science women formed a large chunk of computer science graduates and programmers. This decline started in 1984 when the culture and advertising shifted to market computers and such as being f…

>they are historically and factually wrong No, the money part is pretty accurate historically. Almost every field with high income historically attracted far more men than women once it became public knowledge. Job status and money are very disproportionately more important to men.

Which is why doctors and lawyers, two of the historically most highly paid and high status jobs, now graduate more women than men.

Or wait a second, I guess it isn't public knowledge doctors make a lot of money.

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#322

Post by ChrisMarshallNY » Tue, Oct 11, 2022, 7:38 PM UTC

AngeloR wrote: post #268

What always bothered me about DE&I initiatives is that they are trying to wring diversity out of their existing hiring pool. If your indeed job posts didn't bring diverse candidates then, why do you think it would now? Because you added a "Please apply if you're DiVeRsE" line to it? Don't be ridiculous. If you want diversity of candidates you can't keep going back to the same talent pools. You have to diversify where…

> Look at schools that focus on diverse groups you're targeting.

I believe that Pursuit.org (started by StackExchange) is like that.

NOTE: I am not connected with Pursuit. I did consider working with them, but they weren't interested in my specialty.

Also, a couple of felon-assistance outfits have been mentioned on HN. If you really want diversity, that's a good bet.

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#323

Post by peter422 » Tue, Oct 11, 2022, 7:38 PM UTC

notch656a wrote: post #267

peter422 wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So we throw up our hands and perpetuate the obviously unjust status quo?

The beauty of capitalism is the process that farms for the most net value extracted from the employees is more favored to win. I'm all for competitor companies hiring based on diversity (aka progressive-approved racism) , it creates market opportunities for the firms I work for.

Perfect, so you have no problem with Microsoft having this policy! Problem solved.

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#324

Post by NoImmatureAdHom » Tue, Oct 11, 2022, 7:40 PM UTC

AngeloR wrote: post #268

What always bothered me about DE&I initiatives is that they are trying to wring diversity out of their existing hiring pool. If your indeed job posts didn't bring diverse candidates then, why do you think it would now? Because you added a "Please apply if you're DiVeRsE" line to it? Don't be ridiculous. If you want diversity of candidates you can't keep going back to the same talent pools. You have to diversify where…

This is making a common but wrong rhetorical move, which is ignoring the fact that qualified candidates of the preferred race, with the preferred genitalia or gender presentation, and with the preferred sexual proclivities just aren't out there.

It's not like there is a large pool of black developer talent that firms just keep missing. It doesn't exist. It could be created, but a separate and totally valid question is: why do that? Why should we want every group of people to be representative of the population down to the smallest scale in race x gender x sexual preference?

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#325

Post by pelagicAustral » Tue, Oct 11, 2022, 7:40 PM UTC

irrational wrote: post #280

I've been at a particular company for 20 years. For most of those years our main focus was our core mission, but over the past few years D&I has risen to be our main focus. I've seen people hired who clearly are not qualified and often are not trainable to become qualified. An example is a woman who refused to take any hard assignments and usually made no progress on the easy stuff she was assigned. She was certainly…

Fuck me! I wish I was more diverse.

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#326

Post by marcosdumay » Tue, Oct 11, 2022, 7:40 PM UTC

skavi wrote: post #113

thegrimmest wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're writing with the implicit assumption that private companies ought to be meritocratic above all. I don't think that's the case. I think private people and orgs ought to be free to choose whom they associate with, hire, and promote based on any criteria they can come up with. Nepotism? No problem. Height/weight/age/beauty/culture/hair colour discrimination? You bet. Then these orgs all compete and the most effic…

I think it becomes more complex when you consider wealth concentration.

Well, it's easy to not notice on the middle of all the noise. But policies that fight wealth concentration are much clearer and have many less side effects than the ones for diversity and inclusion.

They are probably more inclusive too, but that measurement is noisy.

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#327

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Oct 11, 2022, 7:41 PM UTC

AngeloR wrote: post #268

What always bothered me about DE&I initiatives is that they are trying to wring diversity out of their existing hiring pool. If your indeed job posts didn't bring diverse candidates then, why do you think it would now? Because you added a "Please apply if you're DiVeRsE" line to it? Don't be ridiculous. If you want diversity of candidates you can't keep going back to the same talent pools. You have to diversify where…

[deleted]

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#328

Post by badpun » Tue, Oct 11, 2022, 7:41 PM UTC

peter422 wrote: post #272

badpun wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is that a problem exactly? What problem is that causing to society? Mind you, there's plenty of women in tech (and often in business or managerial positions, directing those white and asian programmers), they just don't go through the CS degree. I personally don't blame them, my CS degree at least was really super boring and mostly just a way to get an easy and well paying job. And men care about both money and t…

And Men obviously care about being doctors and lawyers more than women, too, of course for the same reasons. 60 years ago >90% of lawyers and doctors were Men and because the desire to be a doctor or a lawyer is mostly dictated by a person's gender those statistics haven't changed at all!

> And Men obviously care about being doctors and lawyers more than women, too, of course for the same reasons.

... Yes? At least in countries such as US, where these people in those professions can make large amounts of money. In my country (Poland), up to very recently, doctors were poorly paid and thus large number of doctors were women.

> 60 years ago >90% of lawyers and doctors were Men and because the desire to be a doctor or a lawyer is mostly dictated by a person's gender those statistics haven't changed at all!

It isn't as clear cut as with the CS, because women (on average) may be put off by the high competetiveness and poor life quality of law/medicine, but they are also drawn (on average) by the fact that in those fields you work with people. Whereas, in CS degree, there's literally nothing for them (on average).

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#329

Post by fzeroracer » Tue, Oct 11, 2022, 7:41 PM UTC

badpun wrote: post #311

fzeroracer wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And men care about both money and technical things much more than women Stop this. These arguments are not only making massive assumptions but they are historically and factually wrong. In the history of computing and computer science women formed a large chunk of computer science graduates and programmers. This decline started in 1984 when the culture and advertising shifted to market computers and such as being f…

Both facts that, on average, women are less interested in things (and more interested in people) and also women, on average, are less interested in money, have a solid backing in research. They're not factually wrong. The field of software business changed rapidly in the 80s. It shifted from a fairly boring and low-paying thing, into an unpleasant and high-pressure field where fortunes were made, even for regular emp…

That's also not true regarding the history of the software field. The explosion in engineer salaries is relatively recent. It was only post-2000s when it became a very lucrative field for engineers and by that point the percentage of women developers had dropped off. This was due to both companies shifting hiring strategies to focus specifically on hiring men as well a shift in advertising for home computers and deriding women.

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#330

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Oct 11, 2022, 7:41 PM UTC

irrational wrote: post #280

I've been at a particular company for 20 years. For most of those years our main focus was our core mission, but over the past few years D&I has risen to be our main focus. I've seen people hired who clearly are not qualified and often are not trainable to become qualified. An example is a woman who refused to take any hard assignments and usually made no progress on the easy stuff she was assigned. She was certainly…

[deleted]