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

We ran the numbers, and there really is a pipeline problem in engineering hiring

blog.interviewing.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

561–570 of 668 posts

Re: We ran the numbers, and there really is a pipeline problem in engineering hiring

#561

Post by goosehonk »

Nasrudith wrote: post #553
goosehonk wrote: post #466

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a person without a CS education but with 30 years of industry experience, including several of The Bigs, I urge young people to get an education in anything but CS. The number of CS degree holders, even the masters and doctors, who struggle with statistics, linear algebra, or even thermodynamics and basic accounting is pretty dispiriting. Get an education and learn to program computers. Two separate things in my h…

That assumes that those mediocore "fizzbuzz test failers" tiers would do better in the domain with another degree. The problem may be in their capabilities predegree.

I don’t think I’m assuming that. They’ll just be a more rounded person.

Re: We ran the numbers, and there really is a pipeline problem in engineering hiring

#562

Post by TrinaryWorksToo »

blub wrote: post #510
hellisothers wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The whole point of the article is that restricting your hiring pool to only CS graduates is a bad pattern and you should consider other qualities instead so saying only 18% of CS graduates are female misses the point. Having no CS degree myself and excelling in a top 10 company I agree with this sentiment, especially seeing the epidemic of “over leveling” the small pool of CS graduates occurring. I’d rather work with…

I'd like to see some proof that there's a large pool of competent software engineers without any degrees (or CS degrees) just waiting to be hired. Additionally, if you meant specifically without CS degrees, I think a lot of companies accept unrelated degrees + experience.

I am one of them. I have no college degree of any kind and bested CS grads in an interview.

Re: We ran the numbers, and there really is a pipeline problem in engineering hiring

#563

Post by abathur »

Mirioron wrote: post #458
abathur wrote: post #439

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wrote a few direct responses, but they all felt patronizing. Apologies for the length, but I'm hoping to avoid that by showing my math, as it were: About 7 years ago, I started to wonder about a cluster of concepts that I've yet to successfully explain to anyone without getting a confused look... Roughly, it's a curiosity about what (if anything) is in the joints and gaps and shadows around the more salient feature…

While I think your criticism about the example given is good, you're still only addressing the specific example given. The parent poster was trying to illustrate why gender parity might not actually be the ultimate goal. The example might have problems, but that doesn't necessarily invalidate the point that was made.

Oh, for sure. I just took the first study. And it's a good example of how big the leaps are in our thinking and communication around these topics.

It's possible the others are all stellar, but my experience says it's not likely. Because we aren't very good at thinking.

Lucid, complete thinking about even fairly simple things--as I imagine most if not all successful programmers have learned--is difficult.

Complex adaptive social systems, which can have the effects of events that happened thousands of years ago still rippling through them, have deep wells of unknown state and dynamics.

The only honest way to reason about them is with epistemic humility.

Re: We ran the numbers, and there really is a pipeline problem in engineering hiring

#564

Post by pcarolan »

blub wrote: post #511
pcarolan wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a good point. EDS during the 80s and 90s used to hire smart people with no college degree and send them to Texas to learn how to code for several months. They built their workforce this way because the demand was higher than the global supply. It would cost a blip on the balance sheet of FAANG co.’s to do the same. Interestingly there was a high number of married people that coupled up during that time. Sound…

"Interestingly there was a high number of married people that coupled up during that time." I guess you meant to say unmarried, not that they were all cheating on their partners.

ha, yeah my wording was confusing - they married as a result of their time there

Re: We ran the numbers, and there really is a pipeline problem in engineering hiring

#565

Post by btilly »

zozbot234 wrote: post #559
btilly wrote: post #547

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Wikipedia article picks one of many pieces of research to quote. Your criticism are fair as a criticism of that specific research paper. But after you've looked at a dozen of them, continuing to say that it is just an artifact of terrible methodology (even though most actually are terrible) becomes much harder to support. But that said, here is a classic test showing strong gender differences accidentally discove…

If I were presented with the task, I would first draw a tilted water line to figure out what the "halfway filled" amount looks like. Then I would "undo" the tilt, taking care to keep the represented amount of water the same. It could be that women are simply being more methodical in their approach.

Try it with actual women. Their reactions make it clear that they recognize the right answer when presented but have no way of calling up “water is horizontal” from the problem itself.

Try it.

Re: We ran the numbers, and there really is a pipeline problem in engineering hiring

#566

Post by shadowgovt »

DoreenMichele wrote: post #497
shadowgovt wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The concept that men and women may have different interests is considered sexist The concept that men and women may have different interests due to biological differences is extremely sexist, yes. For all the sources Damore cited, there's an entire body of academic work (and an entire cultural revolution in the United States spanning upwards of a century) to the contrary on that topic specifically. A large chunk of…

A large chunk of the feminist movement was and is women and men actively working to prove that biology is not a limiting factor in what women can choose to do with themselves That's got nothing at all to do with what was being suggested. Saying women have different "interests" -- or priorities , which is a better word in my opinion -- isn't suggesting they are incapable nor suggesting society should constrain their r…

I'm sorry that happened to you, because whoever did that to you utterly missed the point. It's about choice, and if you chose to be a homemaker, it's exactly as valid a choice as someone who chooses to pursue a career that leaves no time to raise a family if they don't want to raise a family.

What we should avoid is choices being constrained by assumptions about what you want because of your biology (such as the assumption---clearly illegal to act upon but still acted upon nonetheless---that young women are a higher-risk hire and promotion because they probably want to leave the workforce to raise a family in three years). Assumptions like that constrain women who do want a career because the company is going to invest in the male employees who are assumed to be in it for life.

Re: We ran the numbers, and there really is a pipeline problem in engineering hiring

#567

Post by pksdjfikkkkdsff »

Nasrudith wrote: post #555
pksdjfikkkkdsff wrote: post #520

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's certainly not "toxic all the way through". That's such an insulting assumption. I bet you for example that at engineering university women are more likely to get help than men.

The accusations against tech have been a decades long Kafkatrap essentially for the sin of "not fitting in with their expectations and being successful" as a trial where the conclusion is guilty but they must deliberate over what sins. Look at the oldest accusations which failed to illustrate it best. I believe one howler was that "It would make cultures homogenous." At a certain point you are clearly dealing with ba…

Sorry I have difficulties parsing what you wrote. What exactly do you mean? Who are the bad actors?

Re: We ran the numbers, and there really is a pipeline problem in engineering hiring

#568

Post by pksdjfikkkkdsff »

daseiner1 wrote: post #308
pksdjfikkkkdsff wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I hear statements like that, I always wonder if they try to hire 2% pedophiles, too. About 2% of people in the real world are supposed to be pedophiles, so if they want to reflect the real world, they should aim to hire them.

arguing in bad faith seems unnecessary when there's so much authentically wrong with their view

It's not about bad faith, it is about showing the absurdity of aiming for representation of people by sexual preferences.

Re: We ran the numbers, and there really is a pipeline problem in engineering hiring

#569

Post by mepiethree »

leereeves wrote: post #543
oconnore wrote: post #487

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Common practice is to ignore diversity (to the extent possible) in assessing, but not in sourcing.

How can that work for Google or Tesla or any other company that everyone knows about, where anyone who wants to work there is likely to apply?

Lots of people don't apply because they incorrectly believe they are not qualified.

Re: We ran the numbers, and there really is a pipeline problem in engineering hiring

#570

Post by [deleted] »

new_here wrote: post #514
supernova87a wrote: post #187

With such politically charged issues, it's always a problem of people wanting to believe something is possible (and mandatory to pursue) banging their heads against what is true and actually possible. If the percentage of female computer science graduates (as a strong proxy for the available candidate population) is 18% (Google for the facts and stats), how is every company to hit an idealistic goal of 50% representa…

How is this the top rated comment? It swats down the post based on points that the post has already addressed: > Why do we place the blame and assign malice of intent to those who have little control over the constraints? The post suggests searching and hiring outside of the traditional pipeline, which is something that is within control. The comment is then topped off with a strawman argument: > If we put actual per…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN