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

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#491

Post by Manuel_D » Tue, Oct 11, 2022, 9:56 PM UTC

Manuel_D wrote: post #33

logicalmonster wrote: post #2

According to the Microsoft 2021 Annual Diversity And Inclusion report, 34.9% of employees identified as Asian in the US, far exceeding their overall representation in the US population. Why are Asians doing so well? Why can't we replicate this for other groups? And doesn't trying to hire more of other races imply that mathematically speaking, fewer Asians must be hired and promoted to achieve greater equality? Please…

> Why are Asians doing so well? "Asians" are 60% of the world population and encompass a huge variety of cultures, as I'm sure many will point out. That said, it's viable to consider trends and averages, especially when scoped-down to Asian Americans specifically, despite the potential for generalization. Two main reasons that are given: Higher overall academic investment and achievement [1]. As per the study, Asians…

I realize now I totally flubbed on posting the link:

1. https://www.brookings.edu/blog/brown-center-chalkboard/2017/...

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#492

Post by omegaworks » Tue, Oct 11, 2022, 9:57 PM UTC

zozbot234 wrote: post #450

omegaworks wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If D&I is operating at the wrong end of the pipe, it should be rejected outright because it won't work and will cause pointless problems in the meantime. So instead of discussing ways of making D&I work, we should throw it away. Sounds like a newbie dev throwing a tantrum over having to build on a system with legacy code. >the bar was far higher for firing a diverse employee with performance issues, which followed f…

> So instead of discussing ways of making D&I work Parent comment didn't say anything like that. Please assume good faith in discussions. They said that D&I efforts are more likely to work if focused on other parts of the education/industry pipeline, which seems at least plausible.

Parent comment literally said "D&I should be rejected outright" and uselessly categorized the pain of driving institutional change as "pointless problems."

There is a point to trying to change a system that only sees white people at the end of the hiring pipeline. We can debate where it needs to change, but the change is necessary.

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#493

Post by rrradical » Tue, Oct 11, 2022, 9:57 PM UTC

tomp wrote: post #418

lordleft wrote: post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Different "worlds" (neighbourhoods, schools, health care) doesn't happen because of skin color, it happens because of wealth/poverty. This is false. But let me charitably engage your argument and ask you the following -- if your premise is correct, that means that lower access to education and economic attainment among under represented people of color has nothing to do with racism, and everything to do with...some…

Do Obama's daughters have lower access to education? No. So it's not about race. (I just gave you proof.) It's about wealth and social class. Sure, those might correlate with race, and even be caused by racism (past or present), but virtually all real world consequences are downstream of wealth (in particular the ones mentioned: where you live, what you can afford, the amount of free time you have, your health, your…

Has there ever been a poor person that has succeeded in our society? Of course. Therefore I proved money doesn't matter. (Do you see how stupid this argument is?)

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#494

Post by giantg2 » Tue, Oct 11, 2022, 9:58 PM UTC

nonethewiser wrote: post #440

giantg2 wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"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…

Hence the,

"However, I disagree with the conclusion that adding another flawed metric shouldn't be concerning."

I was tangentially wondering if someone has a good way of measuring merit, objectively.

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#495

Post by Octabrain » Tue, Oct 11, 2022, 9:59 PM UTC

nyuszika7h wrote: post #446

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.

Quoted post unavailable.

I hate to have to say something this obvious but here it goes:

Discriminating against a group of human beings for an arbitrary detail such as the color of the skin is indeed racist. No matter if that human being is a freaking north-europe-blonde-arian-white or whatever. No matter if that human being is or not opressed or whatever. Judging people by the color of the skin is WRONG. This ideological bullshit that US is expelling that pretends to normalice racism against white people is atrocious and must end and everyone, like you, that follows this line of thought must be called out and being exposed as what you are, which is being a fucking racist.

Seriously, it is beyond me.

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#496

Post by jimmygrapes » Tue, Oct 11, 2022, 9:59 PM UTC

_manifold wrote: post #466

thegrimmest wrote: post #430

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What is that thing? The people who study this stuff seriously end up concluding that cultural and domestic factors are the biggest predictor. There are plenty of minority groups who at one point didn't have any stuff, and were discriminated against (Jews, Irish, Italians, Chinese, Japanese, etc.). The main difference seems to be cultural values that prioritize the nuclear family and educational attainment. The SAT…

>If America was so racist, the single most successful ethnic minority wouldn't be Nigerians. Do you have a source for this? Not for debate, I'm genuinely wondering where the information comes from. From time to time I've heard things about people from Nigeria being hardworking - haven't looked into it very deep though.

Not a direct source but https://africacheck.org/fact-checks/spotchecks/yes-nigerian-... pops up as a fact check after the same claim was made by Candace Owens. This link (from 2018) refers to several reputable sources of the time. I would guess that there are updated data from the US Census Bureau et al if you want to double check, but from all sources linked it seems Nigeria is and has been on an upward swing as far as exporting educated, successful people to the U.S. (and perhaps retrieving them to prevent brain drain, but I cannot be sure).

FWIW and from anecdotal accounts of acquaintances of mine (not a lot but in the double digits), this comes down to a cultural focus on education and family structure from a young age. Compare to the culture and family values promulgated elsewhere.

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#497

Post by RestlessMind » Tue, Oct 11, 2022, 10:00 PM UTC

CobrastanJorji wrote: post #370

CincinnatiMan wrote: post #88

I don’t work at Microsoft, but another large corporation, and have been told by my manager that right now it is difficult for a white male to get promoted and that we may need to do some strange maneuvers to make it happen if I’m interested in a promo. Was kind of taken aback by the bluntness.

And yet, I'll bet you the majority of your corporation's management layers are white males.

At Google (in Silicon Valley), 7 out of 8 people in my reporting chain were Indian males. Go figure!

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#498

Post by PKop » Tue, Oct 11, 2022, 10:01 PM UTC

Noumenon72 wrote: post #402

PKop wrote: post #254

Why would anyone support a system that explicitly dis-empowers them in preference to other identity groups who themselves are perfectly fine to pursue their own self interest? After years of this, are the "privileged" getting the picture yet? You are a target for elimination in popular society. Either you take your own side, or no one will. There is a clear zero-sum aspect to this. The cultural brainwashing that ther…

Even though you're advocating for your own submission and a bit hot-tempered about it, now that I've followed the link, I'd say it does deliver quality factual content about an important topic. Thanks.

Thanks and yes, not good form to complain about forum meta, was just very frustrated that something so quickly supported by many voters could be blocked so easily, because it has a particularly verboten point of view amongst SV elite. It was definitely a whiny comment.

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#499

Post by arpstick » Tue, Oct 11, 2022, 10:01 PM UTC

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…

with a push for "racial equity" combined with an inept middle management and hr who in order to get equal outcome will push people down instead of lifting people up, the only thing i can see from this is a sharp rise in ethno nationalist idiocy across the board.

i dont want to be right about it but i am not going to be shocked if i start seeing such bubble up as a reaction to this kind of short sighted strategy.

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#500

Post by tremon » Tue, Oct 11, 2022, 10:02 PM UTC

ponow wrote: post #401

faeriechangling wrote: post #385

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The article points to a rising black employee population has some kind of evidence of injustice I agree, it is incoherent for people to say that certain racial groups being over-represented doesn't mean the system isn't fair, but blacks suddenly being hired is evidence the system isn't fair. >So a good thing to do is apply some pressure on the funnel With racism... and honestly this entire process is annoyingly indi…

> it is incoherent for people to say that certain racial groups being over-represented doesn't mean the system isn't fair, blacks suddenly being hired is evidence the system isn't fair Incorrect, for these aren't the same thing: one has existed for a long time and the other is a sudden change. The latter begs an explanation, and it's there: deliberate management manipulation of the candidate pool. It's therefore unde…

it's there: deliberate management manipulation of the candidate pool

In which direction was the manipulation? How do you prove that the pool manipulation was neutral before and is now favouring blacks, rather than it was disadvantaging blacks and has now moved to a more neutral postion?

"has existed for a long time" is just an appeal to tradition. It says nothing about the validity or correctness of the previous situation.