What I Didn't Say • Hacker News Board

Re: What I Didn't Say

#561

Post by yawaramin » Tue, Dec 31, 2013, 9:25 PM UTC

lauradhamilton wrote: post #39

Thanks for the clarification. It is unfortunate that your statements were taken out of context and spun. I typically look for the original source, and am relatively skeptical of poorly edited viral stories such as this one. With that said, I do think that the moderation / upvoting / flagging of Hacker News is overwhelmingly male. I sometimes see sexist comments here, and there doesn't seem to be a good system for wom…

Admittedly, there's no 'flag' or 'remove' option. There is however a downvote option--but only for users with enough 'karma'. You and I, being (relatively) new users, don't have enough karma to downvote posts. _That_ is unrelated to gender.

Re: What I Didn't Say

#562

Post by skybrian » Tue, Dec 31, 2013, 9:47 PM UTC

ChrisNorstrom wrote: post #558

skybrian wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are many studies showing that nearly everyone has unconscious biases including minorities . This is normal . I assume it's true of you and I assume it's true of me. It's a sensible prior, not an insult. [1] http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/between-the-lines/201204...

THAT is a really good point. Thank you for bringing it up. Even after considering your evidence as truth I still have one question left. 1. Isn't a woman, Jessica Livingston (Paul Graham's wife) on the interviewer panel and a part of the application process? It's not just Paul Graham himself. I'm quick to defend Paul in the same way others are quick to blame him. It seems we as a diverse society are so conditioned to…

Putting emotional reactions aside for a moment, I think the real point is that unbiased behavior is quite difficult to achieve and requires discipline. If you're not doing anything systematic to root out bias and just relying on good intentions, it won't be enough. Yes, having a variety of interviewers helps somewhat, but people can be biased in similar ways - it is possible for women to be unconsciously biased against other women, for example.

The solution isn't bias in the other direction, but to look for ways to remove the bias. This is why in science we have things like double-blind studies, for example. In music, doing auditions behind a screen seems to have been effective.

Putting systematic measures in place against bias also tends to help with self-selection, since it assures applicants that they have a fair shot. I believe that's what the original poster was asking for. I don't know what the best solution is for something like Y Combinator, but it seems worth giving it some thought. Of course, it's not going to be so easy as performing music behind a screen.

The percentages you cite show this is a problem in many industries. I doubt that 50% is achievable, but I also don't think it's helpful to either say "these people are sexist" or "yeah, but everyone does it." Those are both examples of moralistic thinking. The solution is to move beyond that sort of thing and treat this as a problem to be solved.

Re: What I Didn't Say

#563

Post by abalone » Tue, Dec 31, 2013, 9:51 PM UTC

nycticorax wrote: post #557

abalone wrote: post #416

pg is being disingenuous. He did only refer to programmers. That's true. But what he left out is that, he defined programmers as the "pool of potential startup founders". (You have to read the full transcript to notice that.) So he is not actually referring to a subset of women. He very clearly says women as a whole are underrepresented as founders because they haven't been hacking since age 13 like the attendees of…

I agree with this completely. PG basically said that the reason there are not many females in YC is that not that many qualified females apply. The interviewer then asked "what would be lost" if YC either lowered their standards for female applicants, or did more to encourage qualified females to apply. And PG basically (and perhaps unintentionally) dodged the question, and reiterated that there aren't as many qualif…

Yup, you nailed it.

The bigger problem with pg's statement is not the 13 year old girl claim. It's that he fully blames them and middle school curriculum while giving YC, PyCon and the startup industry a pass. His stance is we already have an open door and are self-selected, so the problem must be up the line.

You're right, he dodged the question of whether we need to be more proactive, not just open.

Re: What I Didn't Say

#564

Post by RodericDay » Tue, Dec 31, 2013, 10:10 PM UTC

MoosePlissken wrote: post #442

mjburgess wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He isnt "echoing their thoughts" any one who has read Adam Smith systematically would know that the very first few lines of this are explicitly rejected by him. They're childish research-lite versions of a 50s-style classical liberalism. It is much the same as Ayn Rand another amateur philosopher who knew very little on the topics she was writing about. I dislike the "talking head" approach to serious topics. I dont…

You obviously appreciate thoughtful investigation into serious topics, and that's commendable. But I think you're going a bit too far here. I think most people on HN enjoy pg's essays because they tend to be well written and logical. You're annoyed by some of the things he's written/spoken about, but that doesn't mean everyone who likes the guy is a "$-eye'd idiot". You're getting a negative reaction because you've g…

I think most of HN agrees with pg because it gives them ideological cover.

The tech world is meritocratic, politically concentrating on wealth disparity over wealth creation is nonsense, Silicon Valley's problems are minor look elsewhere, etc. etc.

It's a very Panglossian outlook meant to make you feel good about yourself, generally.

Re: What I Didn't Say

#565

Post by WalterSear » Tue, Dec 31, 2013, 10:16 PM UTC

sontek wrote: post #443

yawn wrote: post #26

Jakob Kaplan Moss owes PG a public apology for his behavior. The witch hunt tweets that were coming out of him without getting the facts straight are downright disheartening.

At least the most notable woman and YC founder in the django community, Leah Culver, hasn't backed Jacob in any of his witch hunts. I think this says a lot about how the women in his community feel about his actions.

Just how one woman feels.

Re: What I Didn't Say

#566

Post by ChrisNorstrom » Tue, Dec 31, 2013, 10:19 PM UTC

skybrian wrote: post #562

ChrisNorstrom wrote: post #558

Earlier quoted context omitted.

THAT is a really good point. Thank you for bringing it up. Even after considering your evidence as truth I still have one question left. 1. Isn't a woman, Jessica Livingston (Paul Graham's wife) on the interviewer panel and a part of the application process? It's not just Paul Graham himself. I'm quick to defend Paul in the same way others are quick to blame him. It seems we as a diverse society are so conditioned to…

Putting emotional reactions aside for a moment, I think the real point is that unbiased behavior is quite difficult to achieve and requires discipline. If you're not doing anything systematic to root out bias and just relying on good intentions, it won't be enough. Yes, having a variety of interviewers helps somewhat, but people can be biased in similar ways - it is possible for women to be unconsciously biased again…

"The percentages you cite show this is a problem in many industries" No it's not a problem. This is where you and people like you, differ from me and people like me. You see "differences" as a problem, I see "differences" as a reality and not something that we need to play God with in order to equalize.

So the reason why I'm not on the football team isn't because I'm 5'8" and 125 pounds and can't compete with the other players but because football has a bias against my kind? So instead of me trying to bulk up, gain muscle, gain weight, and try to better compete with the other players I should instead blame the recruiters and coaches for discrimination? Maybe if they lower their standards and we implement some sort of forced quota more little guys like me will feel more welcome in the NFL.

Re: What I Didn't Say

#567

Post by mjburgess » Tue, Dec 31, 2013, 10:26 PM UTC

mercer wrote: post #508

MoosePlissken wrote: post #442

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You obviously appreciate thoughtful investigation into serious topics, and that's commendable. But I think you're going a bit too far here. I think most people on HN enjoy pg's essays because they tend to be well written and logical. You're annoyed by some of the things he's written/spoken about, but that doesn't mean everyone who likes the guy is a "$-eye'd idiot". You're getting a negative reaction because you've g…

Spot on. I mostly agree with the content of mjburgess' comments, but I feel they're not really justified in this context. I occasionally read a comment here that seems to be fawning a bit too much over pg, and just shrug and move on. I don't get the impression that there's a serious personality cult thing going on, nor do I get the impression that pg actively cultivates such a thing. pg writes candidly (but respectfu…

The number of defenders coming out of the woodwork may perhaps suggest something. Whenever one writes something critical about pg or one of his articles you get many people making cultish appeals to authority, "what do you know, he's founded x/y/z" though this has nothing to do with his credibility on Q topic.

Re: What I Didn't Say

#568

Post by mjburgess » Tue, Dec 31, 2013, 10:29 PM UTC

MoosePlissken wrote: post #442

mjburgess wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He isnt "echoing their thoughts" any one who has read Adam Smith systematically would know that the very first few lines of this are explicitly rejected by him. They're childish research-lite versions of a 50s-style classical liberalism. It is much the same as Ayn Rand another amateur philosopher who knew very little on the topics she was writing about. I dislike the "talking head" approach to serious topics. I dont…

You obviously appreciate thoughtful investigation into serious topics, and that's commendable. But I think you're going a bit too far here. I think most people on HN enjoy pg's essays because they tend to be well written and logical. You're annoyed by some of the things he's written/spoken about, but that doesn't mean everyone who likes the guy is a "$-eye'd idiot". You're getting a negative reaction because you've g…

As I have said elsewhere you have to take my comments in the context of his fawning fans. As a guy "writing about shit", fine. But as a guy who plays up to this praise and receives it whatever he talks about, he aint anywhere near the intellectual ballpark for that.

I mean if he wrote an article about race and Cornell West wrote a critique, you'd have hundreds of people coming to defend pg on the back of the cultish Bay Area mentality.

Re: What I Didn't Say

#569

Post by apricot7 » Tue, Dec 31, 2013, 10:54 PM UTC

abalone wrote: post #563

nycticorax wrote: post #557

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with this completely. PG basically said that the reason there are not many females in YC is that not that many qualified females apply. The interviewer then asked "what would be lost" if YC either lowered their standards for female applicants, or did more to encourage qualified females to apply. And PG basically (and perhaps unintentionally) dodged the question, and reiterated that there aren't as many qualif…

Yup, you nailed it. The bigger problem with pg's statement is not the 13 year old girl claim. It's that he fully blames them and middle school curriculum while giving YC, PyCon and the startup industry a pass. His stance is we already have an open door and are self-selected, so the problem must be up the line. You're right, he dodged the question of whether we need to be more proactive , not just open.

Let's look back to the boys ten years ago who didn't start programming, because they didn't want to be socially ostracized and passed over as a potential romantic partner.

Are those boys to blame for their decision? If not, why are you campaigning to only push money in the direction of girls?

Re: What I Didn't Say

#570

Post by nycticorax » Tue, Dec 31, 2013, 11:19 PM UTC

abalone wrote: post #563

nycticorax wrote: post #557

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with this completely. PG basically said that the reason there are not many females in YC is that not that many qualified females apply. The interviewer then asked "what would be lost" if YC either lowered their standards for female applicants, or did more to encourage qualified females to apply. And PG basically (and perhaps unintentionally) dodged the question, and reiterated that there aren't as many qualif…

Yup, you nailed it. The bigger problem with pg's statement is not the 13 year old girl claim. It's that he fully blames them and middle school curriculum while giving YC, PyCon and the startup industry a pass. His stance is we already have an open door and are self-selected, so the problem must be up the line. You're right, he dodged the question of whether we need to be more proactive , not just open.

All this having been said, I think that the level of vitriol PG has been subjected to is completely unfounded. I think it's unclear whether YC is morally obligated to lower its standards for female applicants, or to make special efforts to encourage them to apply. The first is fraught, since it implicitly means you're selecting less-qualified people over more-qualified ones (the Ivy League universities do this for disadvantaged minorities, Caltech notably does not), the second would be nice (and I think basically all top-tier universities in the US do this for disadvantaged minorities), but it's not clear to me that it rises to the level of a moral responsibility.