341–350 of 520 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Affirmative action means you and everyone else there knows you had to pass a lower bar, of course that makes impostor syndrome worse. No, it doesn't. But if that makes you feel better, I hope you continue telling yourself that.
Wait, what? That's literally the definition.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
At some point, some one has to sit down and write or debug the code. It's never going to be as human oriented as something like teaching, being a therapist, or managing people full time.
It's more human oriented than writing math proofs! Why is the gap between those two fields double digit percentage points?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I find that interesting because I see more and more successful developers that explain that a successful developer is someone who has good people skills. If you think about it, there not intrinsic ground to support the idea that computer science activities in themselves are more "things" than "people". They may be more "things-oriented" right now _because_ it is currently male dominated, but it does not mean it is a…
At some point, some one has to sit down and write or debug the code. It's never going to be as human oriented as something like teaching, being a therapist, or managing people full time.
Also, one of my point is that the "non human oriented" is also part of the image, but not of the reality. I see more and more successful developers that explains that "sit down and write or debug the code" on your own is not a fundamentally big part of the job, but it is in practice a big part because of the current mentality and because some developers want to work like that.
I keep seeing developers thinking that they are "special". But in practice, it is a job very similar to other role in a company. An accountant, for example, also need to sometimes sit down and do careful work that requires not being disturbed. It often feels like developers are talking about "breaking the flow" or "all these useless meetings" or "the managers that invent work to justify their role" or ... as if it is not identical for all the other roles (there are small differences, but nothing justifying that developer is somehow less human oriented than accountant).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's more human oriented than writing math proofs! Why is the gap between those two fields double digit percentage points?
Statisticians works directly with managers, almost all math professionals are statisticians and not doing theoretical maths.
So, no, computer science is not less people-oriented than statistics. You may personally interact less with people, but it is just because you are personally less people-oriented, not because your job is fundamentally less people-oriented.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Why do you think they're so skewed? Why are there so many women working in mathematics and particularly in cryptography compared to general computer engineering? Why are women so well represented in other hard science fields, both in absolute terms (especially in fields like biochemistry) and in relative terms compared to computer science and engineering?
Basically, students who were previously exposed to CS education in high school excel in the introductory courses and often downplay the difficulty of the concepts. This is a very male-oriented perspective to take.
That's why programs like Girls Who Code try to address the gap earlier in the pipeline, since it's hard to fundamentally change the attitudes experienced individuals have in early CS courses. Other approaches some schools have tried include separating intro CS courses by prior experience.
Interestingly, studies have shown that women who stick with the CS curriculum perform as well their male counterparts in higher-level CS courses regardless of their initial exposure to CS, though women often think more poorly of their own abilities [2].
[1]: https://newsroom.ucla.edu/stories/cracking-the-code:-why-are... [2]: http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=3017771
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You don't think affirmative action has anything to do with that? Affirmative action means you and everyone else there knows you had to pass a lower bar, of course that makes impostor syndrome worse.
Calling it a lower bar is a completely disingenuous interpretation, when the reason for such policies in the first place is that the bar for entry is much higher for minority groups to be hired.
even if i had to pass a higher bar to get into university, when i realize that the bar is lowered to get a job, then how i got into university doesn't really matter anymore to me or to my new colleagues. so all the problems that come with the bar being lowered still do apply
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Ultimately it should be his wife's responsibility to make sure that she feels accomplished right? No. In a healthy relationship partners care about each other. This means also enabling them to pursue their dreams. It’s not just talking, it’s also doing something, e.g. taking parental leave or sacrificing your own opportunities so that your wife could use hers. Without this kind of support she won’t have much choice…
> it’s also doing something, e.g. taking parental leave or sacrificing your own opportunities so that your wife could use hers. Without this kind of support she won’t have much choice. Even in a relationship, you have to own your own choices and be responsible for your own happiness. Seems like an ideal situation at least. As one of the few couples who can afford to live a good life on a single income, she'd already…
This comment is perfect illustration of sexism. You don’t even consider the option of father taking parental leave while the mother works. Why is it woman who must do the sacrifices? And of course the idea of hiring someone to come: this is not efficient and not scalable, so not a solution for entire population that would empower women.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nobody inside the org cares about gender ratios, but they do have to react to people outside of the org who care a whole lot. It's easier to explain reality than to try and change it.
Idk, I've read b2b contracts that have demands similar to this. They arent explicit, its softer.
Mostly the behaviour is determined by tangible external benefits rather than any kind of real belief that gender ratios should be acknowledged.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is a backlash to the heavy handedness of DEI. You can’t freeze out white males simple because they are white males. You need to remove barriers to entry based on sexism and such, but you can’t exclude a whole large class of people because that class had it good in the past. That gets you South Africa.
> You can’t freeze out white males simple because they are white males. I agree with this. However, I have been working in tech for quite some time now, and I have not seen any place where white males have been frozen out of employment or funding. More typically, in my personal experience, they represent most of the staff and leadership and materially all of institutional funding recipients. Perhaps my experience is…
Google getting sued for that. https://www.theverge.com/2018/3/2/17070624/google-youtube-wi...
Same accusation against Microsoft https://www.theverge.com/2019/4/19/18508013/microsoft-pro-di...
Disney doing it. https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/watch-disney-exec-...