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

What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

cspicenter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 972 posts

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#431

Post by colinmhayes »

jobs_throwaway wrote: post #425
colinmhayes wrote: post #416

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even Lebron James children have to deal with racism. Someone spray painted the n word on his house. Are poor people more disadvantaged? Obviously. But all else equal, being black or brown in this country means you face more adversity.

So you're okay with Lebron's children being given advantages in hiring process over a poor white candidate?

I think it’s ok to factor race into the criteria that resumes are judged on because it affects the experiences those students have had and I do think thought diversity is valuable in and of itself. It’s a tricky situation obviously.

But at the resume level all we're doing is using heuristics to decide who deserves an interview. Are white applicants with a 3.2 gpa more likely to be successful than black ones with a 3.1 gpa? I have no idea. I don't think you do either. Really the only way to find out is to hire some black applicants and compare them which might be what msft is doing.

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#432

Post by screye »

Qtips87 wrote: post #110
outworlder wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why are Asians doing so well? Why can't we replicate this for other groups? What _are_ the groups? "Asian" can mean anything. From India, China, Japan, many countries in Oceania, etc. I think the classification is fundamentally flawed.

Agree. Asian is kind of like Hispanic, it doesn't mean anything in terms of ethnicities.

Hispanic is even more confusing given that the population composition of some "hispanic" countries is 90%+ white.

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#433

Post by balls187 »

Dig1t wrote: post #382

I work at a different FAANG and it seems like more and more the only news that we get from corporate is related to DEI. Also a lot of hiring details are now hidden from ICs. It used to be that you would be apart of the interview panel as an interviewer and then you would get together with your team afterwards and everyone on the team would vote yes/no and that would pretty much be it. Now it’s made by a manager elsew…

> I do worry that my kids won’t be diverse enough to be able to get into a decent school or get a good job like I was able to when they’re older.

That comment implies you take for granted that your kids will get into a school, and will have a job.

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#434

Post by nonethewiser »

guhidalg wrote: post #381
tomp wrote: post #365

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a nice way to excuse your racism. A lot of people use this perverted logic. But at the end of the day, it's still evil racism. Different "worlds" (neighbourhoods, schools, health care) doesn't happen because of skin color, it happens because of wealth/poverty. So if you apply a racist filter on top of the (implicit) wealth filter, you're just being racist against poor Asian & white people.

Ya you are, but you know white people and Asians are less likely to be poor compared to Hispanics and African Americans so reality is fighting against your argument.

> Ya you are, but you know white people and Asians are less likely to be poor compared to Hispanics and African Americans so reality is fighting against your argument.

Yet there are more white people in poverty than black people in the US. If we are trying to give opportunity to impoverished people we would judge by poverty. If we want to live in a racist society then we would judge by race.

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#435

Post by Mezzie »

forgomonika wrote: post #151
Decker87 wrote: post #23

At this moment in time I think companies can gain a major hiring advantage by simply hiring the best regardless of race/gender. So many large companies are shooting themselves in the foot distorting incentives and saying "no" to people who are the wrong color/gender.

That doesn't work. There are some really amazing people out there that don't fit the typical tech mold of straight cis (white) guy. They don't stick around if they have to navigate a monoculture that doesn't understand that they are constantly throwing out micro-aggressions to people outside of their view of what acceptable behaviour is. Separating your home life from work life only works for so long before you start…

I currently work in a lingerie store after having spent a fair amount of time in 'professional' environments.

I'm less tired coming home from 8 hours on my feet dealing with the public than I was in professional settings. I don't have to hide everything about myself and my background (I'm a first-generation college student with a poorish upbringing) or constantly worry about what all my interactions with colleagues mean for my 'career'.

I will say my class background is more of an issue than my sex/sexuality, but my sex was way more of a problem in my teens and early 20s. The interesting thing is that being a techy child was fine, being a techy teenage/20 something girl SUCKED, and being a techy 30 something woman is fine.

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#436

Post by nsxwolf »

balls187 wrote: post #433
Dig1t wrote: post #382

I work at a different FAANG and it seems like more and more the only news that we get from corporate is related to DEI. Also a lot of hiring details are now hidden from ICs. It used to be that you would be apart of the interview panel as an interviewer and then you would get together with your team afterwards and everyone on the team would vote yes/no and that would pretty much be it. Now it’s made by a manager elsew…

> I do worry that my kids won’t be diverse enough to be able to get into a decent school or get a good job like I was able to when they’re older. That comment implies you take for granted that your kids will get into a school, and will have a job.

What does that mean? Just about anyone can get into a school, or get a job.

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#437

Post by nonethewiser »

hbrn wrote: post #424
rrradical wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Discrimination in selecting who to interview is absolutely a form of discrimination. Exactly. That's what the parent comment is saying. But they are thinking about the entire funnel, not just the end of it. By the time a slate of candidates reaches a company's hiring process, there has already been an immense selection bias against minority candidates. Two people growing up in different places (not different cities…

> Imagine if a slate of candidates were all black. That would seem kind of odd, right? Why would that be odd? It does happen in sport, and nobody cares (nor should they). > So a good thing to do is apply some pressure Why is it good? Author talks about not being able to hire for several months due to lack of DIE candidates in the pipeline. Of course a giant like Microsoft can afford to waste resources, but for a lot…

> Imagine if a slate of candidates were all black. That would seem kind of odd, right?

In the US? Well yeah. Black people comprise 1% of college graduates. White people are 60%.

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#438

Post by nonethewiser »

rrradical wrote: post #287
Manuel_D wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So minority candidates are given an advantage in getting their foot in the door, but still have to prove themselves qualified for the job by doing well in interviews. Discrimination in selecting who to interview is absolutely a form of discrimination. Imagine I tell my recruiters to exclusively interview white Catholics, and I respond "well, those white Catholics still had to pass the skill-based interview. Had we…

> Discrimination in selecting who to interview is absolutely a form of discrimination. Exactly. That's what the parent comment is saying. But they are thinking about the entire funnel, not just the end of it. By the time a slate of candidates reaches a company's hiring process, there has already been an immense selection bias against minority candidates. Two people growing up in different places (not different cities…

> Imagine if a slate of candidates were all black. That would seem kind of odd, right?

In the US? Well yeah. Black people comprise 1% of college graduates. White people are 60%.

It doesn't help when students are under-qualified for the schools that they get into. It hurst every party.

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#439

Post by colordrops »

topaz0 wrote: post #404
colordrops wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely - there aren't clearly defined lines between cultural notions of race, and the scientific community doesn't even recognize race as anything but a social construct [1]. So in the end it's either how someone self-identifies, or the arbitrary superficial judgement of race by the hiring team, which is patently ridiculous. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_(human_categorization) "Modern science regards rac…

"Rules made by society" is exactly why it is relevant here.

Can you explain further? Not getting your meaning.

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#440

Post by nonethewiser »

giantg2 wrote: post #79
mikkergp wrote: post #18

Posts like this seem reactionary and equally anti-intellectual. Sure I know that a lot of the DE&I stuff is frustrating for people. But it seems like if you really want to dig into this you need to take broader approach. Can you actually prove that people are in any way capable of measuring merit, especially for leadership decisions, which is pretty squishy to begin with? It seems to me like throwing some extra diver…

"Can you actually prove that people are in any way capable of measuring merit, especially for leadership decisions, which is pretty squishy to begin with?" I'd love to hear answers for this. In my experience, it seems ratings are just the boss's unverified opinion. However, I disagree with the conclusion that adding another flawed metric shouldn't be concerning. "They mention an increase of from 3% to 5% of membershi…

>> "Can you actually prove that people are in any way capable of measuring merit, especially for leadership decisions, which is pretty squishy to begin with?"

> I'd love to hear answers for this. In my experience, it seems ratings are just the boss's unverified opinion.

Therefore institute race-based policies?

All that matters here is how things _should_ work. The hiring process should be based off merit. They should not be based off race. We should do our best to correct these when they deviate.

Post reply on HN