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

What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

cspicenter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

751–760 of 972 posts

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#751

Post by rizzaxc »

bitti wrote: post #727
Dig1t wrote: post #382

I work at a different FAANG and it seems like more and more the only news that we get from corporate is related to DEI. Also a lot of hiring details are now hidden from ICs. It used to be that you would be apart of the interview panel as an interviewer and then you would get together with your team afterwards and everyone on the team would vote yes/no and that would pretty much be it. Now it’s made by a manager elsew…

I share your concern... Started as a manager in a successful scale-up and as usual our engineering staff is white & male (we are hiring from European Timezone). In order to secure the funding round, the higher management has introduced a diversity targets, which is driven aggressively by HR. Funny enough lots of the European laws forbid asking if the candidate is a member of an "unrepresented" group, so I guess we'll…

hold up you need DIE to convince investors? how does this make sense; wouldn't they be more concerned about your company's cold, hard numbers?

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#752

Post by PubliusMI »

Georgelemental wrote: post #590

Wokeness is first and foremost a legal phenomenon. You must check the box, because your manager must check the box, because the VP must check the box, because otherwise some regulator or lawyer might get angry and sue. The civil rights legislation of the 1960s helped to destroy the evil of segregation, we should all be grateful for that. But the system that was once healthy and beneficial has now become a cancerous t…

The Civil Rights legislation was blatantly unconstitutional and we should not be surprised at the modern consequences.

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#753

Post by psd1 »

_sigh_

The common theme I see in all these happy HN contributors getting their panties in a twist over affirmative action is that transactions exist in America that discriminate against white people: for a given promotion, a black person is advanced over a white person who is better qualified.

It's like some idiot plugging away at debugging a single query timing out, while the cluster is down.

Just take a step back. It's a really important intellectual ability.

Are you a Grandmaster if you won all your matches starting with a material advantage?

- attend school with class sizes of 60: start minus four pawns - limited role models in middle-class jobs: start minus a bishop - generational effects from iniquitous zoning laws: minus a rook

Affirmative action is an attempt to give back the bishop. Other strategies are also needed.

The theme I'm bristling at is, approximately, complaining that you lost a piece because your opponent was given a bishop.

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#755

Post by the_gipsy »

purpleblue wrote: post #202
comex wrote: post #132

> You might imagine this policy doesn’t bias the hiring process, since managers are still free to choose who to hire after interviewing the diverse candidates. But because of the number of applicants, most are rejected based on their resumes. Imagine diversity candidates are 1% of the applicants but 15% of those interviewed. This gives those candidates opportunities to do well in interviews that their peers with simi…

It's not those with a disadvantage. It's strictly based on skin color. That's the problem. You have no idea if they are disadvantaged or not. There are plenty of middle-class and upper-class Black families these days. Unless you think that all Black people are disadvantaged. To me, it's a "ruinous empathy" form of racism if you think "Oh look at that poor Black person!" without knowing anything about her background.

> It's strictly based on skin color. That's the problem. You have no idea if they are disadvantaged or not.

We do know that skin color is a decisive factor in discrimination. You suggest to let this continue to happen (do nothing) because some specific individuals of a discriminated skin color do not seem to be discriminated.

So you just need one token black guy, not even in every company, just one, promoted to near executive-level, so that people like you can say "look; if they want to, they can!"

And then you can all go on with your lives pretending you're there because of your merits.

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#756

Post by LawTalkingGuy »

Manuel_D wrote: post #133
anderskaseorg wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The post doesn’t suggest there’s any mandated quota for hiring or promotion—only for interviews or consideration. And it doesn’t suggest any secrecy about this policy.

If I tell my recruiters to never interview black people, it's not discrimination because it's not actually prohibiting them from hiring or promotion? Quotas in choosing who to interview or who to consider for promotion is absolutely a form of discrimination. I've worked at a company that implemented this. It resulted in a vast double standard: white and asian males only got interviews if they came from elite colleges…

> recruiters (who had bonuses attached to diverse hires)

It's hard to attribute longterm success of the company to any given hires but race is easy to count. What is easy to measure comes to dominate your thinking.

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#757

Post by LawTalkingGuy »

topaz0 wrote: post #383
yucky wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>They mention an increase of from 3% to 5% of membership of senior black leaders. So now instead of those 3% being seen as having earned their position, all 5% will be seen as having been given an unfair advantage. So now it's not only unfair to the people excluded based on skin color but it's unfair to those who benefitted strictly because of the perception they now have to deal with as having not really earned thei…

> all 5% will be seen as having been given an unfair advantage. Only by the kinds of people who tend to assume the worst about Black people.

We're simultaneously being told that the pipeline doesn't contain enough minorities and that catching more fish from a smaller pond isn't going to impact the average size of those fish.

I know one megacorp that achieved its diversity by paying above-market for those workers and poaching very qualified people. That's expensive and zero-sum, exacerbating the situation elsewhere, but at least their employees knew diversity didn't mean unqualified.

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#758

Post by amai »

Outside of the US the race/ethnicity of a person is not even allowed to be asked for or even stored. I actually believe that this leads to many problems in the first place and actually promotes racial segregation. The first time I had to think about what race I am was when I moved to the US.

Stop asking people what race they are, stop storing their race. And do the same for gender and religion. Just treat your people as humans. And problems like this will just disappear.

As a start you can anonymise applications of candidates: https://wol.iza.org/articles/anonymous-job-applications-and-...

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#759

Post by bedobi »

andirk wrote: post #629
bedobi wrote: post #428

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are no countries that are "heavily one demographic"

What?? It is common for certain areas to be mostly populated by a certain demographic. Iceland: 93% ethnic Icelandic. Bolivia 88% Mestizo/Indigenous. Thailand 93% Buddhist. India 80% Hindu. Japan 98% ethnic Japanese. Nigeria 100% fast. Dive in to specific geographic areas within a country and it is often fully homogenous. https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2013/0…

Oh yeah, everyone in those countries are the same ethnicity, gender, the same relationship and family status, the same interests and personality type etc etc?

Literally no diversity proponents are saying tech teams in Taiwan must have 20% African Americans or whatever and you'd have to be completely missing the point, or willfully missing it, to think so. In any case, it's pretty telling of your level of understanding of the topic that you seem to think that's what we're saying.

Likewise using friggin India and Nigeria as examples of "fully homogenous" countries is also very telling of your knowledge about other countries from your own. Just wow.

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#760

Post by PKop »

nonethewiser wrote: post #698
PKop wrote: post #488

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is always useful and prudent to see things from the perspective of those attacking you. "Know your enemy.." You can argue over definitions and terms as much as you want, but the uniform you wear is often defined by your opposition. In other words, it may not be completely relevant what you or OP think diverse is or isn't. It is very relevant what the power structures and people implementing these policies think it…

I don't mean they shouldn't worry. I mean they shouldn't use language that puts blame on their kid for not being "diverse" (which is also a non-sensical description of 1 person).

I'm sorry but you're just missing the point. You're taking the term literally, but it is very simple in practical terms how this actually plays out:

diverse is code word for non straight White male. Slightly more diverse would be straight White female.

Obviously OP is simply saying, as a White man, he worries his children through no fault of their own by virtue of birth would be excluded or limited by these cultural trends.

Blame on their kid? What sense does this make? He's blaming the system.

Post reply on HN