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

UBC bans non-minority candidates from applying for tenure-track quantum position

cs.ubc.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 119 posts

Re: UBC bans non-minority candidates from applying for tenure-track quantum position

#81

Post by zomglings »

cdot2 wrote: post #29
zomglings wrote: post #20

My first reaction was, "This is fucking ridiculous!" But after looking at their complete jobs page, it seems like this requirement of being from one of the designated groups may be coming from the source which funds the Canada Research Chair? (see the PDF they link on their job description: https://academic.ubc.ca/sites/vpa.ubc.ca/files/documents/EDI... ) If so, then I don't really see a problem with it. It seems lik…

I think specifying the race of applicants for positions is bad

First of all, they do not only whitelist/blacklist by race. They also whitelist/blacklist by other characteristics (gender, sexual preferences).

It seems as if the Canada Research Chair is funded by the national government of Canada specifically to increase diversity in Canadian academia. It just so happens that UBC is hosting one position for quantum computing. Presumably there are other Canada Research Chairs available at other universities. Presumably, the government of Canada also offers funding for positions that does not discriminate based on the designations that this particular funding does discriminate on.

Maybe the overall allocation of national funds to academic positions is not as biased as we may think just by looking at this job posting.

All I'm saying is, if the source of the funding is the national government, then a knee-jerk reaction against UBC is irrational without because it doesn't take into account the national effects of higher education funding by the Canadian government.

(Also, how is this different from any number of fellowships offered in the US higher education system to women and minorities?)

Re: UBC bans non-minority candidates from applying for tenure-track quantum position

#83

Post by jjj123 »

yostrovs wrote: post #67
causality0 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Two Spirit is considered a contemporary, umbrella term that is specific to the Indigenous LGBT2QQIA (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, Two Spirit, queer, questioning, intersexual, asexual) community. Frankly I'm not sure whether to laugh at the idea a gender identity can be limited to a specific ethnicity or to condemn it as inherently racist. This is entirely too meta.

It's surprising to lump asexual people with bisexual, lesbian, etc. It's like lumping people that hate cars with members of Mercedes and Porsche clubs into a "community".

I know you’re just making a joke, but the premise is a off. The queer community is a community because we are all sexual minorities. Asexual people obviously fit that description.

Re: UBC bans non-minority candidates from applying for tenure-track quantum position

#84

Post by cdot2 »

zomglings wrote: post #81
cdot2 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think specifying the race of applicants for positions is bad

First of all, they do not only whitelist/blacklist by race. They also whitelist/blacklist by other characteristics (gender, sexual preferences). It seems as if the Canada Research Chair is funded by the national government of Canada specifically to increase diversity in Canadian academia. It just so happens that UBC is hosting one position for quantum computing. Presumably there are other Canada Research Chairs avail…

Any other examples of discrimination are also bad. How is this hard dude.

Re: UBC bans non-minority candidates from applying for tenure-track quantum position

#85

Post by zomglings »

cdot2 wrote: post #84
zomglings wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First of all, they do not only whitelist/blacklist by race. They also whitelist/blacklist by other characteristics (gender, sexual preferences). It seems as if the Canada Research Chair is funded by the national government of Canada specifically to increase diversity in Canadian academia. It just so happens that UBC is hosting one position for quantum computing. Presumably there are other Canada Research Chairs avail…

Any other examples of discrimination are also bad. How is this hard dude.

I have worked in academia as a minority. To do so is to face constant exposure to discrimination on almost every front.

Honestly, I believe the entire concept of higher education needs a radical change and that projects like Khan Academy will lead the way.

Within the context of academia, though, I don't have any particular problem with small changes applied at a national level to try and address the systemic discrimination that the majority of people in the system are blind to.

Re: UBC bans non-minority candidates from applying for tenure-track quantum position

#86

Post by boardwaalk »

humanistbot wrote: post #45

In this thread: A bunch of people from the U.S. not realizing that employment laws and norms are quite different in Canada, where this kind of "employment equity" (or what is called "affirmative action" in the U.S.) is required, especially for public institutions.

Or you could be not realizing that people are uncomfortable with it regardless of those "laws and norms."

It's tempting to bring up something else more severe to prove the point: Should we be okay with what's happening with the Uyghurs in China because it's not happening here (wherever that is)? I would say no.

Re: UBC bans non-minority candidates from applying for tenure-track quantum position

#88

Post by WkndTriathlete »

olliej wrote: post #69

Is this clunky? Yes. Is there a better way of doing it? Maybe. Is it an explicitly biased policy? Yes. However, correcting a biased system requires that there is a period with enforced change bias to correct the existing bias. This is because there are many ways previous explicitly biased policies entrench that bias even if the current environment is no longer explicitly biased. Even if we were to assume that everyon…

> However, correcting a biased system requires that there is a period with enforced change bias to correct the existing bias.

I guess all my calculus and systems theory textbooks were wrong, then.

Seriously, though, there are myriad problems with this premise:

a) It implicitly assumes that the system itself is biased instead of its inputs. b) It assumes that the system isn't already being corrected based on the first- or second-derivative on the inputs. c) Feedback loops (enforced change bias) can result in nasty exponential on oscillational responses.

And in the context of the code itself:

d) The code assumes the problem is systemic across all public departments and thus must apply to all of them; e) The code makes suitability to position (which is the point of hiring a professor) secondary to considerations irrelevant to the position. (Plain English: given two candidates, an old, experienced, non-racist white guy who tries to each and encourage all of his students vs. any candidate of one of the protected classes whose biases run toward their protected class, you must hire the biased candidate. And you can't tell if they are biased because the current environment enables that candidate to continue their bias in the current environment, which is to attempt to lift up those protected classes at any cost - if they exclude other protected classes or "white guys" it won't show up as a negative on the demographic statistics assembled.)

I agree there is a discrimination problem with certain people, but I don't think the solution is ever going to come from legislation like this. I think the solution has to be grass-roots and be done by gradually retiring out those with generational unconscious bias or by firing those that are outright discriminatory, and by gradually hiring in a younger generation that is (hopefully) less discriminatory.

That's a lot more work than making a half-assed law and winning votes because of that law, though.

Re: UBC bans non-minority candidates from applying for tenure-track quantum position

#89

Post by wffurr »

ctoth wrote: post #14
wffurr wrote: post #10

Majorly editorialized title for a link to the position posting. IIUC that's not OK by the site guidelines.

So does that change what the site says? Does that change the requirements for the position?

Glad this got flagged off. What a disaster this entire thread is.
Post reply on HN