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

Jewish problems (2011)

arxiv.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 101 posts

Re: Jewish problems (2011)

#81

Post by hackuser »

nailer wrote: post #57
Udik wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn't that be called "affirmative action" in the US?

Third-party academic research showing that Asian-Americans have to score significantly higher on the SATs than other students to gain admission to Harvard. The reason given was that Harvard uses uses participation in non-academic events as a mechanism to exclude Asian students. You can read about it, and the lawsuit filed, here: http://www.wsj.com/articles/complaint-alleging-discriminatio...

Hmm ... your citation's headline is: "Harvard Asian-American Bias Complaint Dismissed". The rest is paywalled.

Re: Jewish problems (2011)

#82

Post by misiti3780 »

If you read the book Perfect Rigor, about Grigori Perelman (solved the Poincare Conjecture - won the fields metal, but would not accept the 1MM dollar prize on principle) they tell multiple tails of anti-semitism in the Russian math departments at the time. According to the book, Perelman was basically really lucky to be born when he was and where he was, and that is really the only reason he was given a chance to get the education he got. The world is obviously a better place for guys like this.

Re: Jewish problems (2011)

#83

Post by hackuser »

Udik wrote: post #9
fennecfoxen wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The differences: In the US, they'd ask everyone the same questions, but have different standards for the results. The practice would not be secret, and so there would not be subterfuge of this scope (the plausible-deniability angle is gone). Finally, the practice would be used to boost the effective scores of the select less-qualified candidates, instead of damaging the scores of select more-qualified candidates. (Th…

True, it's important, if ever a mechanism like this is applied, that it is made official and mandated by law. I don't agree that the system described works in a substantially different way from affirmative action, though, as you can consider the current admission tests to already include the "Jewish problems", for a number of points equivalent to the "score boosting" applied to the other candidates. Most importantly,…

> the intended effect is not to discriminate against an ethnic group, but balance its overwhelming predominance in a particular field. Which is precisely the objective of affirmative action.

This is clearly false. The intent of affirmative action is to give certain oppressed groups get a little assistance; it is not to reduce the predominence of any other one. The latter might be a consequence, but it's certainly not the intent.

Re: Jewish problems (2011)

#84

Post by hackuser »

fennecfoxen wrote: post #20
_yosefk wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is "discriminating against a group" different from "balancing its overwhelming predominance in a particular field"? The dictionary definition of "discrimination" says there's no difference. Is the definition that says there is a difference some sort of a moral standard? What are the thresholds of that standard - at what point group members outdoing others warrants affirmative action and by how much the numbers of…

> How is "discriminating against a group" different from "balancing its overwhelming predominance in a particular field"? Since you ask, I'll repeat myself. Suppose you have lots of people applying for 100 slots in the university. Affirmative action at a US university designed to give you a quota of, say, 10% minorities could, in the worst case, crowd out qualified persons #91-100. "Jewish questions" deployed against…

> a quota of, say, 10% minorities could, in the worst case, crowd out qualified persons #91-100

You're assuming #91-100 are better candidates than the minority candidates. I think the resasoning behind affirmative action is that #91-100 are worse students who just had access to far better resources and thus produced better quantitive results. I'd rather hire the minority candidates.

Re: Jewish problems (2011)

#85

Post by Chinjut »

WildUtah wrote: post #66
Chinjut wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was under the impression UC Berkeley was similar to Caltech in this regard?

It is supposed to be, but the administration organized a Massive Resistance campaign against the California Civil Rights Initiative. [0] Through mass 'holistic' review of individual applications for racial background, the University of California follows the same racial quota admission system that nearly all elite American universities do. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massive_resistance

Not sure what this is in reference to, but as you can see at http://opa.berkeley.edu/uc-berkeley-fall-enrollment-data, UC Berkeley's freshman enrollment in fall 2015 was about 43% Asian (and, for comparison, 24% white), which does not indicate strong enforcement of racial caps in the manner suggested by tacon.

The analogous numbers for CalTech are 45% Asian and 27% white; see https://www.registrar.caltech.edu/academics/enrollment.

[I take no position in this post on whether the high representation of Asians, low representation of other American racial minorities, and decisions resulting in these outcomes are good or bad things (or deserve the label "meritocratic", or so on). I am simply noting that UC Berkeley seems similar to CalTech in all these regards.]

Re: Jewish problems (2011)

#86

Post by hackuser »

WildUtah wrote: post #30
fennecfoxen wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the intended effect was merely to balance its overwhelming predominance, sabotage in the exams is the most problematic way to do so, because of the way that it can efface the best talent in the group; diversity-quotas of some sort would damage the field less. More broadly, though, if you think that this was "merely" about balance and that there was no anti-Semitic sentiment in academia in Soviet Lithuania in the 1…

This is relevant because employment discrimination law in the USA prohibits the use of any tests where certain protected racial categories score worse than the national average by a specific amount. Usually that amount is specifically that each protected race must achieve four fifths of the passing scores of any other group. (Yes, that is a vague and easily gamed standard. It was made up by lawyers in the Department…

Those tests were not everything you say they are. 'Objective' tests have historically been used to exclude minorities from many things, even from voting. Those lionized tests didn't select for quality of applicant, from what I know.

> The result is the worst of all possible worlds

I think it's probably a much better world, where the second-rate candidates, who only got the job because their competition was excluded, have been replaced by the best candidates.

As a simple example, think of professional sports, which for a long time wouldn't hire black or latino athletes. To imagine the impact on quality, just imagine the reverse, if today Major League Baseball announced, 'we're firing all the black and latino players and replacing them with white people - but don't worry the quality will be the same'. It would be absurd.

It's also very sad to say it's the 'worst of all possible worlds'. The worst was when all these people were excluded from jobs and every other part of our society. That was criminal and tragic.

Re: Jewish problems (2011)

#87

Post by RivieraKid »

Moshe_Silnorin wrote: post #76
RivieraKid wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First because it validates the hypothesis that there are significant differences in intelligence between ethnicities (i.e. if Ashkenazis are genetically smarter, perhaps the lower avg IQ in blacks is at least partly genetic). And second, it can cause some people to perceive Ash. as "others", enemies and give rise to various conspiracy theories.

I'll grant you the first point. But what sort of conspiracy theory? It elegantly explains overrepresentation without any coordination. Once you account for the Ashkenazis much higher IQ, there isn't anything for a conspiracy to explain.

Yeah, you can be right, both points were just guesses without much thought.

Re: Jewish problems (2011)

#88

Post by hackuser »

kelukelugames wrote: post #69
guelo wrote: post #51

Jews, and many other minority groups, form tight communities were they look out for each other help each other out. So Jewish businesses and organizations tend to discriminate in hiring, recommendations, etc. Happens all the time, very overtly. Since at this point Jewish organizations and businesses in the US are long established and powerful in many areas, this anti-gentile discrimination is problematic to society a…

Happy MLK jr Day! Less than 50 years ago, it was legal to discriminate against all minorities. And some of my older Jewish Americans friends can give awful examples. They still don't feel save in the US. You might think it's irrational, but discrimination scars. Minorities are forced to form tight communities. The majority tribe also looks out for its own. Something like 70+% of white people don't have nonwhite frien…

It's sad that I'm seeing so many innocuous statements, especially those that simply say discrimination exists, modded down.

Re: Jewish problems (2011)

#89

Post by to3m »

matt-attack wrote: post #41
fennecfoxen wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How is "discriminating against a group" different from "balancing its overwhelming predominance in a particular field"? Since you ask, I'll repeat myself. Suppose you have lots of people applying for 100 slots in the university. Affirmative action at a US university designed to give you a quota of, say, 10% minorities could, in the worst case, crowd out qualified persons #91-100. "Jewish questions" deployed against…

I'm sure your argument makes #95 feel much better.

How would they know they were #95?

It's not clear why failed applicants would automatically leap to the theory that they didn't get in because of affirmative action, rather than just assuming they weren't good enough. Competition for good academic institutions is generally stiff enough that this is the most likely reason anyway.

Re: Jewish problems (2011)

#90

Post by kelukelugames »

hackuser wrote: post #88
kelukelugames wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Happy MLK jr Day! Less than 50 years ago, it was legal to discriminate against all minorities. And some of my older Jewish Americans friends can give awful examples. They still don't feel save in the US. You might think it's irrational, but discrimination scars. Minorities are forced to form tight communities. The majority tribe also looks out for its own. Something like 70+% of white people don't have nonwhite frien…

It's sad that I'm seeing so many innocuous statements, especially those that simply say discrimination exists, modded down.

I am stating provable facts. shrug

1) today is mlk day

2) discrimination was terrible one generation ago

3) most people have narrow social circles.

Post reply on HN