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

PSF has withdrawn $1.5M proposal to US Government grant program

pyfound.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

491–500 of 886 posts

Re: PSF has withdrawn $1.5M proposal to US Government grant program

#491

Post by slater »

ethical_source wrote: post #489
ModernMech wrote: post #474

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let me put it this way: computing as a field, and programming languages in particular would not be where they are today without the hard work and dedication of LGBTQ people in particular. I mean, we have to look no further than Alan Turing to understand this at a visceral level. In his tradition, LGBTQ people flock toward this field. The reason the flag is in the Rust discord logo isn't because people are throwing th…

[flagged]

> Don't trouble yourselves with removing the flag. We will be removing it for you soon enough.

tf is this nonsense

Re: PSF has withdrawn $1.5M proposal to US Government grant program

#492

Post by dllthomas »

klipt wrote: post #473
dragonwriter wrote: post #461

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but can't you at least see how weird it is that 'Women in STEM' is very accepted but a 'Men in STEM' program would never fly? I can see how it might seem weird to an alien who knew what men and women were, but had no context for the existing state and history of society. I can't see how it would seem weird to anyone else, however.

If you include biological and medical sciences in STEM, STEM graduates have been majority female for decades. Where is the DEI for men in the female dominated STEM subjects?

> Where is the DEI for men in the female dominated STEM subjects?

Is that rhetorical? Have you looked, or just assumed their absence?

My cursory search seems to indicate that there are some, although I don't have bandwidth to investigate in any depth and I'm not sure just what criteria you'd want to use for qualification.

Re: PSF has withdrawn $1.5M proposal to US Government grant program

#493

Post by klipt »

epistasis wrote: post #484
tgsovlerkhgsel wrote: post #423

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is how DEI should work, and probably does in some, or maybe many, cases. In other cases, it boiled down to "this quarter, we only have headcount for 'diverse' candidates", metrics for DEI hiring that turn into goals, and e-mails stating "only accept new L3 candidates that are from historically underrepresented groups". I expect that I'll get accused of making this up, which is why the latter is an exact quote sh…

> "this quarter, we only have headcount for 'diverse' candidates", Such a statement from those with hiring authority is highly illegal. Any HR department that would let this message be delivered, either explicitly or implicitly, would open the company to massive lawsuits, such as the one you linked to. It's as bad as allowing sexual harassment. Linking the term DEI to illegal hiring practices is like linking having a…

That's like saying "the Crusaders weren't real Christians because real Christianity is peaceful"

See also: No True Scotsman Fallacy

Re: PSF has withdrawn $1.5M proposal to US Government grant program

#494

Post by ModernMech »

slater wrote: post #491
ethical_source wrote: post #489

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> Don't trouble yourselves with removing the flag. We will be removing it for you soon enough. tf is this nonsense

It's a variant of what Alan Turing heard before they chemically castrated him. Same shit, different century.

Re: PSF has withdrawn $1.5M proposal to US Government grant program

#495

Post by [deleted] »

th wrote: post #341

It seems like a number of the "DEI is anti-merit discrimination" messages in this thread are overlooking how DEI work usually works. A relevant tweet from 2016 ( https://x.com/jessicamckellar/status/737299461563502595 ): > Hello from your @PyCon Diversity Chair. % PyCon talks by women: (2011: 1%), (2012: 7%), (2013: 15%), (2014/15: 33%), (2016: 40%). #pycon2016 Increased diversity in communities usually comes from ac…

[deleted]

Re: PSF has withdrawn $1.5M proposal to US Government grant program

#496

Post by klipt »

adriand wrote: post #445
anal_reactor wrote: post #416

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> DEI is at its heart a type of discrimination. You might argue that the end justifies the means, but if intermediate step is that a person gets different treatment depending on their sex or skin colour, then it is discrimination. The purpose of DEI is to rectify the discrimination that is already present. It isn't as though we live in a discrimination-free world and then DEI arrived on the scene and suddenly started…

> The purpose of DEI is to rectify the discrimination that is already present.

Randomized studies show that men now face more hiring discrimination than women do: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/375863746_Men_Now_F...

So shouldn't there be more DEI rectifying anti-male discrimination now?

Re: PSF has withdrawn $1.5M proposal to US Government grant program

#497

Post by epistasis »

klipt wrote: post #493
epistasis wrote: post #484

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "this quarter, we only have headcount for 'diverse' candidates", Such a statement from those with hiring authority is highly illegal. Any HR department that would let this message be delivered, either explicitly or implicitly, would open the company to massive lawsuits, such as the one you linked to. It's as bad as allowing sexual harassment. Linking the term DEI to illegal hiring practices is like linking having a…

That's like saying "the Crusaders weren't real Christians because real Christianity is peaceful" See also: No True Scotsman Fallacy

No, that's not at all the case, the crusaders were acting under the blessing of the church. It still may not be "real" Christianity, but it's not like there were DEI advocates out there giving guides on how to break the law. I was at two companies promoting DEI that were explicit about non-discrimination and had extensive training on it to prevent the illegal actions linked in that lawsuit.

There's no "this is DEI this is not DEI" but any halfway sane and truthful assessment would focus on what the proponents claimed, said, and propagated as their intentions. Just as the Christians of the time were intending to do with the crusades.

Calling this a "no true Scotsman fallacy" is just attempting to misapply a logical fallacy to avoid looking at the issue truthfully and honestly.

Re: PSF has withdrawn $1.5M proposal to US Government grant program

#498

Post by eadmund »

th wrote: post #341

It seems like a number of the "DEI is anti-merit discrimination" messages in this thread are overlooking how DEI work usually works. A relevant tweet from 2016 ( https://x.com/jessicamckellar/status/737299461563502595 ): > Hello from your @PyCon Diversity Chair. % PyCon talks by women: (2011: 1%), (2012: 7%), (2013: 15%), (2014/15: 33%), (2016: 40%). #pycon2016 Increased diversity in communities usually comes from ac…

Reaching out only to members of certain groups rather than others is still invidious discrimination. When based on characteristics like race, sex or national origin it is probably illegal, although I am not a lawyer.

Re: PSF has withdrawn $1.5M proposal to US Government grant program

#499

Post by acdha »

klipt wrote: post #473
dragonwriter wrote: post #461

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but can't you at least see how weird it is that 'Women in STEM' is very accepted but a 'Men in STEM' program would never fly? I can see how it might seem weird to an alien who knew what men and women were, but had no context for the existing state and history of society. I can't see how it would seem weird to anyone else, however.

If you include biological and medical sciences in STEM, STEM graduates have been majority female for decades. Where is the DEI for men in the female dominated STEM subjects?

Where is your data showing those programs don’t exist? For example, conservatives like to talk about the plight of male nurses but even a cursory search shows that there are exactly the kind of programs you’d expect to find.

Re: PSF has withdrawn $1.5M proposal to US Government grant program

#500

Post by rayiner »

epistasis wrote: post #484
tgsovlerkhgsel wrote: post #423

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is how DEI should work, and probably does in some, or maybe many, cases. In other cases, it boiled down to "this quarter, we only have headcount for 'diverse' candidates", metrics for DEI hiring that turn into goals, and e-mails stating "only accept new L3 candidates that are from historically underrepresented groups". I expect that I'll get accused of making this up, which is why the latter is an exact quote sh…

> "this quarter, we only have headcount for 'diverse' candidates", Such a statement from those with hiring authority is highly illegal. Any HR department that would let this message be delivered, either explicitly or implicitly, would open the company to massive lawsuits, such as the one you linked to. It's as bad as allowing sexual harassment. Linking the term DEI to illegal hiring practices is like linking having a…

> Such a statement from those with hiring authority is highly illegal. Any HR department that would let this message be delivered, either explicitly or implicitly, would open the company to massive lawsuits, such as the one you linked to.

You’re correct about the law, and the EEOC interpretation has been consistent for decades: https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/guidance/section-15-race-and-color.... But in practice, in many though not all places, “DEI” became a vehicle for double standards, quotas, and other illegal hiring practices.

I suspect what happened is that a generation of professionals went through university systems where racial preferences were practiced openly: https://nypost.com/2023/06/29/supreme-court-affirmative-acti.... When they got into corporate America, including law firms, they brought those ideas with them. But even though pre-SFFA law authorized race-based affirmative action in universities, it was never legal for hiring.

So you had this situation where not only did the big corporations engage in illegal hiring practices. But their law firms advising them were themselves engaged in illegal hiring practices. They all opened themselves up to major liability.

Post reply on HN