Women: Learn to Program This Summer • Hacker News Board

Re: Women: Learn to Program This Summer

#471

Post by jrs95 » Sat, Mar 23, 2019, 1:07 AM UTC

Grustaf wrote: post #406

wsy wrote: post #381

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Society still has an immense effect on what children and teenagers prefer to do, via instilling role models. There is an amazing small experiment with primary school children. First, no girl in the class even has the idea she could become a pilot, because this is seen as a boy's/men's profession. Then a female pilots and a female car mechanic visit the kids, and explain what they are doing. Afterwards, half of the gi…

Also, since medicine is so much more prestiguous than programming, and probably at least as well paid, why do you even want women to go into programming? Why not let ambitious women study medicine, law and whatever else they do, and be rich and happy?

Because any male dominated space is seen as a threat and must be eliminated, even if men initially gravitated into that space partly due to social rejection outside of it.

Re: Women: Learn to Program This Summer

#472

Post by yakshaving_jgt » Sat, Mar 23, 2019, 1:28 AM UTC

turbohz wrote: post #209

yakshaving_jgt wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Overcorrecting for bias is not the same as removing bias. You never heard the phrase "two wrongs don't make a right?"

You're the one calling it an overcorrection. To me it is a weight scaling correction

Obviously I now can’t prove it as I didn’t take a screenshot, but when I wrote my reply their comment specifically used the word “overcorrecting”. Clearly, they have edited their comment.

I was quoting that commenter.

Re: Women: Learn to Program This Summer

#473

Post by strken » Sat, Mar 23, 2019, 1:30 AM UTC

fzeroracer wrote: post #47

i_am_proteus wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We use inclusive definitions of “women” and “female” and welcome trans women, genderqueer women, and non-binary people who are female-identified. If you are interested in the program, it seems like you could identify yourself as female and apply. Especially if there's no in-person interview. Cynically, if enough [biological males who identify as] men elect to identify as women for this application, the selection te…

This is a great way to get a company to instantly reject you at the interview step if they have one or fired shortly after being hired. Because, you know, most companies look up the profile of candidates on LinkedIn, social media etc. Unless you actually consider yourself transgender, you would quickly be caught and removed just as quickly.

There is a level of salary discrepancy where I would transition and start living as a woman, probably somewhere around the point of women earning 50 to 60% more. I'm not even sure it would be a lie; gender is pretty unimportant to me, and at some point the potential gains overcome inertia and habit.

Re: Women: Learn to Program This Summer

#474

Post by sokoloff » Sat, Mar 23, 2019, 1:33 AM UTC

mywrathacademia wrote: post #402

wsy wrote: post #397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which underpriviledged groups are never supported?

Isn't it obvious? Poor people. The politically favored are women but by opening this to all women you only help women who are already privileged not poor women living in ghettos or from other poor backgrounds

I’m not sure I follow or maybe you have a step in your head that I can’t see.

@jl is literally giving money for living expenses for women to do this program. How does that help a rich or middle class woman more than a poor woman interested in the program? If anything, I’d expect the impact of $9K to be far greater for the last than the first (and presumably able to be treated as a tax-free gift or even if not, taxed at a low rate). If that’s the case, it seems more enabling, not less.

Re: Women: Learn to Program This Summer

#475

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Mar 23, 2019, 1:33 AM UTC

fzeroracer wrote: post #272

Pyxl101 wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The research community does not have a better explanation for the disparity than social bias That's not really true. There is a lot of research showing that men and women have different interests and make different life choices, and that these choices impact career demographics. One of the most well-researched differences is that men tend to be more interested in "things", especially mechanical things, and women te…

How does this explain for example, the following two points I will assert: 1. Software Engineering has become more social over time. The idea of the loner software developer has sort of vanished as open offices become the norm and the collaborative nature of software engineering grows. 2. Women majors in computer science has dropped like a rock over the past few decades [1] These two points seem to refute your explan…

[deleted]

Re: Women: Learn to Program This Summer

#476

Post by dimgl » Sat, Mar 23, 2019, 1:35 AM UTC

manfredo wrote: post #25

rosterface wrote: post #3

I recently completed a very difficult job search where I unfortunately had to lean on my ethnicity (I’m Mexican) to pass through very overt screening against white men. I was shocked to hear from multiple companies, large and small, that they did not want men and white men in particular. Now we see a YC co-founder giving 40 women $9000 to learn to program. Where does it end? I was really sad that while I personally c…

I can confirm your observations. At my company we have a couple policies. 1. We only accept applicstions from candidate from non-traditional backgrounds if they're diverse. Diverse is defined as any of the following: women, black, Hispanic, or native American - maybe also veterans but I'm not sure. Non-traditional background means coming from a coding boot camp, or majoring in a non-computing related field. I think a…

How does anyone see this and not think this is absolutely insane? Surely this is illegal?

Re: Women: Learn to Program This Summer

#477

Post by throwawaylolx » Sat, Mar 23, 2019, 1:49 AM UTC

CydeWeys wrote: post #350

root_axis wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about the article is disingenuous? It doesn't even seem to be making any arguments.

Seriously. It's 100% factual. "I'm ponying up money for so-and-so program. Here are the qualifications and stipulations." It's only disingenuous if she's lying about these things and actually not doing this, which seems like an absurd accusation.

The downvoted user clearly claims dang is disingenuous, not the article...

Re: Women: Learn to Program This Summer

#478

Post by yakshaving_jgt » Sat, Mar 23, 2019, 1:49 AM UTC

SolarNet wrote: post #400

DBYCZ wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A scholarship for a CS program seems a much more worthy cause, as everyone with an internet connection has access to learn everything needed to begin a career in tech.

You realize scholarships are way more exclusive than half of all people right? I got a scholarship based off of the street I lived on. I got a scholarship based off of the career choice of my fraternal grandmother (e.g. if she had been my maternal grandmother I would not have qualified). I got a scholarship based off of how similar I was able to make architecture sound to programming. Women only scholarships are bare…

Nitpick: you mean “paternal”.

Re: Women: Learn to Program This Summer

#479

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Mar 23, 2019, 1:54 AM UTC

mywrathacademia wrote: post #402

wsy wrote: post #397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which underpriviledged groups are never supported?

Isn't it obvious? Poor people. The politically favored are women but by opening this to all women you only help women who are already privileged not poor women living in ghettos or from other poor backgrounds

[deleted]

Re: Women: Learn to Program This Summer

#480

Post by krastanov » Sat, Mar 23, 2019, 2:13 AM UTC

Grustaf wrote: post #359

krastanov wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of sibling comments stick to the "gender equality paradox" while forgetting all the other research on the topic (this is already a heavy selection bias). Yes, women in Scandinavia and women is Bangladesh, given the chance to pursue a career in STEM, might make choices that superficially support the notion that women self-select out of tech. But this line of reasoning forgets to compare what other choices/opport…

Well but that is the point isn’t it. Women in poor, unfree countries go into tech because it makes a huge difference to their personal finances and comfort. In Scandinavia everyone lives in freedom and comfort, so you can work with something you actually enjoy instead.

Certainly, that is a big part of it. But this should be carefully compared to the "background signal" in these cultures. To take it to an extreme: how certain are you that men go into STEM for reasons different than boys being told "STEM is for boys". Both young boys and young girls have that "common sense" imposed on them by our culture, so it is very unreliable to claim that any choice is unrelated to that cultural experience as a child.