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

Martin Fowler: The Fallacies and Reprocussions of Diversity Imbalance

martinfowler.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 177 posts

Re: Martin Fowler: The Fallacies and Reprocussions of Diversity Imbalance

#51

Post by queensnake »

jkr124 wrote: post #41
MartinCron wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it so hard to imagine that maybe there are meaningful group variations within the human species? The worst things humans have ever done to each other have all centered around the notion of "meaningful group variations within the human species". Without hard science, it's a scary and dangerous place.

"The worst things humans have ever done to each other have all centered around the notion of 'meaningful group variations within the human species'." That is an extremely strong statement to make without justification. It sounds like a forbidden knowledge-type of argument. Science should decide if there are statistically significant intergroup variations. But right now, that is strictly verboten by the type of argume…

To be fair, if the gates of acceptance of HBD (human biodiversity) were thrown open, people fear there would be a lot more social friction. And I think you're right about the worldview bit, too - people not being seen as quite equal would be a major change. Gah, I wish HBDers would discuss the repercussions of acceptance of HBD instead of just sniping from the sidelines (not meaning you, now), as the mainstream won't accept it until they're comfortable with the consequences.

Re: Martin Fowler: The Fallacies and Reprocussions of Diversity Imbalance

#52

Post by yummyfajitas »

cturner wrote: post #40
yummyfajitas wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not only does he make the logical fallacies you suggest, but he also ignores plenty of evidence that there might be natural causes: For instance, there is plenty of evidence women are less likely to be very good (or very bad) at math: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/321/5888/494.summary http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21038941 There is also evidence women are more risk averse, making them less likely to work in…

I was told I'd never be a programmer because I didn't get good marks in math and physics, that was sixteen years ago. Let's kill the myth. I can't see any reason why being genuinely good at math is more important to effective programming than being good at chemistry (layers and sequence), biology (complex systems) or languages (building meaning from abstract or incomplete signals). You do not need to be good at late…

I can't see any reason why being genuinely good at math is more importnat to effective programming...

I would strongly suspect that just as math and CS ability are correlated, so would math and chemistry. Biology less so, since biology is mostly just memorizing (at least for the first 3-4 years of college).

Anyway, I cited math data mainly because it's so widely studied. I get so many downvotes when I discuss this topic with data that I'm not even going to attempt to write about stuff I have no readily available data on.

I see a different pattern that goes in mostly the reverse direction. [...] young nerds [...] are therefore undesirable to be around.

Um, that's not the reverse direction. That's the same direction as what I said: women avoid computing because they are intolerant of geeks.

Note that young nerds also often act "bizarrely" towards men and each other. I certainly did before I learned to pass. But the claim of the author of the studies I cited is that women are less tolerant of "bizarre" behavior.

Re: Martin Fowler: The Fallacies and Reprocussions of Diversity Imbalance

#53

Post by queensnake »

I thought someone would have mentioned this by now, but in other cultures (my sample: India, China, Ukraine), there /are/ more women programmers. At least, I've worked with proportionately more women from the above nations, than white American women. Meaning it's culture and not ability or /native/ inclination, at least.

Re: Martin Fowler: The Fallacies and Reprocussions of Diversity Imbalance

#54

Post by youngnerd112 »

cturner wrote: post #40
yummyfajitas wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not only does he make the logical fallacies you suggest, but he also ignores plenty of evidence that there might be natural causes: For instance, there is plenty of evidence women are less likely to be very good (or very bad) at math: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/321/5888/494.summary http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21038941 There is also evidence women are more risk averse, making them less likely to work in…

I was told I'd never be a programmer because I didn't get good marks in math and physics, that was sixteen years ago. Let's kill the myth. I can't see any reason why being genuinely good at math is more important to effective programming than being good at chemistry (layers and sequence), biology (complex systems) or languages (building meaning from abstract or incomplete signals). You do not need to be good at late…

Sorry to be so brutally honest....but personally with women rejecting me everywhere in a downright rude manner as an undesirable nerd it is hard not to have a bias against them!

Agreed that perhaps not all women are like that...but for one that is nice there is at least a hundred shallow bitches around!

Re: Martin Fowler: The Fallacies and Reprocussions of Diversity Imbalance

#55

Post by dgabriel »

mhartl wrote: post #43

Although it's easy to become accustomed to it, it's pretty obvious the child care world has some serious issues in diversity. By this I mean that it has some notable differences in proportions of people compared to the general population. One of the most obvious differences is the low proportion of men, which is true all over the world. In the US, where I spend a good chunk of my time, the over-representation of Lati…

Your rewrite is completely valid. Were you expecting it to be absurd? It's not. The same interesting questions arise. I'm sure you can come up with reasons why men may choose not to make their living caring for children, even though they'd prefer to do so. Is this not a problem we should attempt to fix?

Re: Martin Fowler: The Fallacies and Reprocussions of Diversity Imbalance

#56

Post by MartinCron »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #38
MartinCron wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is he arguing that since a certain type of rhetoric has been used to ill purpose in the past that it should be looked upon extra critically now? All rhetoric should be looked at critically, and there's nothing wrong with being extra critical of rhetoric that's historically dubious. What's your initial response to the phrase "separate but equal"?

...there's nothing wrong with being extra critical of rhetoric that's historically dubious. Yes there is. It biases our thinking. Here is a non-controversial example of this: "Millikan measured the charge on an electron...got an answer which we now know not to be quite right...It's interesting to look at the history of measurements of the charge of an electron, after Millikan. If you plot them as a function of time,…

Good point, but that narrative feels a lot like a specific example of sloppy science and poor measurement.

I'm going to stand by the notion that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, even if that may create a small bias toward conventional thinking.

Re: Martin Fowler: The Fallacies and Reprocussions of Diversity Imbalance

#57

Post by loumf »

It's fun to take apart the logic, rhetoric, and nitpick on every word of this post. We could argue the premise all day long -- and 5 years from now there will be fewer women, minorities, etc, than there are now.

Instead I prefer to take constructive action to change this, without worrying if (1) it is natural or unnatural or (2) it would be better. I accept that the current state is unnatural and a more balanced population would be better.

If you agree, please post replies here with what you think can/should be done (or what you are already doing). If you disagree, please reply to one of the other threads.

Re: Martin Fowler: The Fallacies and Reprocussions of Diversity Imbalance

#58

Post by greggman »

I'm having a problem with this as well. I'm sure I get the bozo bit flipped on me but...

Let's pick some other topics. What's the percentage of men vs women that knit as a hobby? Crochet? Cross Stitch? Scrapbook? Ok, those are hobbies. But I'll bet if you asked most programmers, at least the good ones, they got started programming as a hobby and that happened to end up leading to a career.

How about nurses? In the USA is 93% women. 7% men (or was 14 years ago, not sure about today)

Are you going to argue that 50% of the participants of all those things should be men and that something is wrong because they are not at 50%?

I 100% want to see more women programmers but I'm at a loss on how to get more women interested in being a programmer. Should we try to do more? Of course! But there's a part of me that feels it's like saying "I wish more people didn't like pop music". I can wish all I want but if the biggest problem is culture it's going to take some serious concentrated effort to change. I'm talking like every 5th Hollywood movie and every 4th TV show needs to start showing women as programmers and in positive light the same way in the 70s they all started making anti-discrimination stories and girls can do anything stories. It's going to take women's magazines running articles on how awesome programming every month for years. It's not enough just to say women can do anything. If you want to change culture it's going to take a lot more than just a few words on a blog or a few more male geeks being aware of things they do that drive women off.

Re: Martin Fowler: The Fallacies and Reprocussions of Diversity Imbalance

#59

Post by cturner »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #52
cturner wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was told I'd never be a programmer because I didn't get good marks in math and physics, that was sixteen years ago. Let's kill the myth. I can't see any reason why being genuinely good at math is more important to effective programming than being good at chemistry (layers and sequence), biology (complex systems) or languages (building meaning from abstract or incomplete signals). You do not need to be good at late…

I can't see any reason why being genuinely good at math is more importnat to effective programming... I would strongly suspect that just as math and CS ability are correlated, so would math and chemistry. Biology less so, since biology is mostly just memorizing (at least for the first 3-4 years of college). Anyway, I cited math data mainly because it's so widely studied. I get so many downvotes when I discuss this to…

    > I get so many downvotes when I discuss this topic with data
It's a bit like the flying spaghetti monster book where they correlate the decline of piracy with global warming. You need to present data, and then also provide a link between it and the point you're making. I dispute the strong link between math and programming.

I accept your correction in that we're making the same point about young men. What I should have said is that the way you phrase it makes it seem like it's women that initiate the pattern. I don't think that's so. Although perhaps you could go back further and ask, what made the men neurotic in the first place, was it cruel rejection or bullying by prom queens - no idea. I just found the phrasing backwards.

Re: Martin Fowler: The Fallacies and Reprocussions of Diversity Imbalance

#60

Post by lifeisstillgood »

For a given value of true, Programming is just normal human language literacy with slightly stricter syntax rules.

As such I say there should be as many good women programmers to good male programmers as there are good women writers.

Post reply on HN