Dozens of Companies Are Using Facebook to Exclude Older Workers From Job Ads

Post by otterley » Thu, Dec 21, 2017, 9:17 PM UTC

ec109685 wrote: post #280

mabbo wrote: post #93

> “Used responsibly, age-based targeting for employment purposes is an accepted industry practice and for good reason: it helps employers recruit and people of all ages find work,” said Rob Goldman, a Facebook vice president. No, that's... that's literally the opposite of 'helping people of all ages find work'.

Perhaps there are advertisements that work better for some age groups than others? So by targeting, they can deliver the right ad to the right user.

Post by otterley » Thu, Dec 21, 2017, 9:21 PM UTC

imh wrote: post #104

I once worked at a company that was having trouble finding women candidates. We were a tiny company that at that point largely recruited out of the people we knew, who were largely people we'd worked with before and people we went to school with. Mostly dudes. There was a discussion at some point about the legality of trying harder to get women engineers than men. My understanding is that you can try to get more peop…

Post by s73ver_ » Thu, Dec 21, 2017, 9:30 PM UTC

eric_b wrote: post #288

ryandrake wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The topic of your rant is something that it took me forever to accept as a software engineer. Nobody cares about quality. Your method is refactored to be super-fast and have no branches? Nobody cares. Elegant, re-usable architecture? Nobody cares. You've optimized an inner loop in assembly and increased speed by 30%? Nobody cares. Made it to zero compiler warnings? Nobody cares. No known crashers left in the bug trac…

I agree with you, and this is a hard lesson to learn. But I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing. Software should really only be measured by the value it provides. If a terribly buggy piece of poorly written code still saves hundreds of man hours a week, it's a win. (Unit tests be damned) If that big ball of mud that's using 20 year old technology still prints a billion dollars a year - that's a win. (Microservic…

Post by wef23f » Thu, Dec 21, 2017, 10:03 PM UTC

asmosoinio wrote: post #440

leggomylibro wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a race to the bottom. You could pay more for better work that gets done more slowly (fewer hours as people have families, etc,) or you could pay less for worse work that gets done more quickly. Well, iOS11 needs to ship on its annual schedule, non-negotiable. And the SVP will really complain if I ask for more money this quarter. So, cheap it is. If a bridge falls down, it's really obvious and people die. If bill…

> It's a race to the bottom. You could pay more for better work that gets done more slowly (fewer hours as people have families, etc,) or you could pay less for worse work that gets done more quickly. But in my experience, this is not true AT ALL. More experienced people might work less hours, but will produce the actual end results much quicker - both in hours and in calendar time. Especially when considering that l…

Post by omginternets » Thu, Dec 21, 2017, 10:04 PM UTC

bsder wrote: post #535

omginternets wrote: post #503

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The woman who gave the presentation services her company's contract with a tech company, that, let's just say, has a big share of the search engine market. If you're being oblique to avoid libel, it's worth noting that libel law doesn't care about whether nor not you name an entity. It cares about whether or not you've identified an entity. Google has been identified.

And if there were multiple people in that audience who concur about that quote, said entity is on the hook for a class action for millions of dollars. Somehow, I don't think this one is going to get pursued ...