Google kills diversity hiring targets • Hacker News Board

Re: Google kills diversity hiring targets

#81

Post by qwerpy » Wed, Feb 05, 2025, 9:38 PM UTC

voldacar wrote: post #34

sandworm101 wrote: post #25

The loss of dei programs is bad but isn't the big bad. The big bad comes when businesses start being forced to prove that they arent doing dei. Every hire may soon have to be examined under inverse lenses: to prove that they are not dei. Real evils will then creep back into business culture. Be under no illusions. Those evils still lurk in every back office.

The loss of DEI programs is good, as it reduces the pressure for these companies to discriminate against white and asian men in hiring.

Agree. As a parent to an Asian boy, I’m thankful that steps are being taken to ensure he isn’t discriminated against for school admissions and job applications.

Re: Google kills diversity hiring targets

#82

Post by unsnap_biceps » Wed, Feb 05, 2025, 9:43 PM UTC

goalieca wrote: post #50

paxys wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well we are shutting down the Department of Education...

Since education is a state level responsibility, why not handle it there? We don’t have a federal education ministry in Canada for instance.

The goal was to ensure that there was a more balanced result of education across the country. California can afford to spend way more per child than Kentucky can, so without some sort of federal level balancing, California's children are just going to be more likely to prosper than Kentucky's. This doubly applies to funds for disabled or underdeveloped children who needs extra support from the school system to be successful. Those programs are going to be largely cut across the red states.

Re: Google kills diversity hiring targets

#83

Post by readthenotes1 » Wed, Feb 05, 2025, 9:44 PM UTC

skywhopper wrote: post #58

xnx wrote: post #26

Would be great to be more resources put in at the very start of the pipeline (e.g. early childhood education). It's very hard to "solve" "diversity" at the time of hiring when candidates have already had decades of disadvantage.

The fair way is to do so at all levels of the pipeline because it turns out people can overcome their past if given the support and resources to do so. But it’s far easier and cheaper to invest early on. All that said, real structural racism and sexism and other prejudices continues to exist, and so the pipeline will always be a problem. But a company like Google, which makes obscene profits every quarter, should be…

Didn't they find out in Sweden that, given the opportunity, women were not as interested in STEM as they were in other fields?

Re: Google kills diversity hiring targets

#84

Post by nerdjon » Wed, Feb 05, 2025, 9:46 PM UTC

goalieca wrote: post #50

paxys wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well we are shutting down the Department of Education...

Since education is a state level responsibility, why not handle it there? We don’t have a federal education ministry in Canada for instance.

But if the name of the game is efficient spending why are we replicating much of the same work in 50 states instead of just once federally?

That would make far more sense if this was only about money.

Re: Google kills diversity hiring targets

#85

Post by programmerpass » Wed, Feb 05, 2025, 9:47 PM UTC

skywhopper wrote: post #74

programmerpass wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, if businesses had to prove that each hire is related to dei, which was the previous state of affairs, many would argue that is when evil creeps into business culture. So, it goes both ways, supposedly.

But this never happened.

“The survey highlights two interesting facts: 46% of tech employees have noticed an increase in DEI investments in 2020, and 51% companies now report on DEI metrics. However, the report also highlights the need for continued action. 14% of technology companies today do not invest in DEI programs and initiatives.”

Source: https://www.spiceworks.com/hr/diversity-inclusion/news/51-of...

I’ve found 5-10 more similar sources via a quick google search.

While the law did not compel a business to report dei metrics to my knowledge (besides boards of public companies via the SEC), the impact of mass virtual signaling had the practical effect of compelling businesses of embracing dei or face being labeled as racists or immoral, which is a form of coercion by itself. I’d argue it would have been be better if such actions were simply deemed as illegal rather than racists or immoral. So with that said, I would argue the previous state of affairs was significantly worse with dei measures in place.

Putting the power back to the law rather than to a group of loosely collected virtual signalers is a better world imo.

Re: Google kills diversity hiring targets

#86

Post by like_any_other » Wed, Feb 05, 2025, 9:48 PM UTC

almostdeadguy wrote: post #80

like_any_other wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> sources which are occasionally dead links Dead links owned by the very companies being reported on. If a company lets their diversity report 404, why do you hold this against statisticians that gathered the data when it was live? > from different years You work with the data you have. Because the data isn't perfect, we should disregard it entirely and rely on your prejudice instead? > without enough detail to actua…

> Dead links owned by the very companies being reported on. If a company lets their diversity report 404, why do you hold this against statisticians that gathered the data when it was live? Why should I trust data I can't verify? > You work with the data you have. Because the data isn't perfect, we should disregard it entirely and rely on your prejudice instead? Junk in, junk out. > The data is about the state of the…

> Why should I trust data I can't verify?

Have you tried? Does archive.org have those urls? Are there other reports on those companies' diversity? Have you checked their mandatory government EEO-1 diversity reports [1]? It rather seems that you're nitpicking, looking for an excuse to ignore what by all accounts looks like someone's honest work. Do you have, for these companies, reports suggesting wildly different demographics, that is making you so skeptical?

[1] https://www.eeoc.gov/employers/small-business/legal-requirem...

Re: Google kills diversity hiring targets

#87

Post by Gothmog69 » Wed, Feb 05, 2025, 9:49 PM UTC

like_any_other wrote: post #13

Well, they've already achieved diversity, haven't they? Whites were already under-represented at Google (and at 18/23 tech companies) back in 2017 [1]. If they've rolled over for anyone, it was for the Asian lobby, who is over-represented at 23/23 of those tech companies, and now won't be facing DEI pressures to reduce their numbers. [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20250127210140/https://informati...

sounds like we need a working definition of diversity? Usually it just means way less white people.

Re: Google kills diversity hiring targets

#88

Post by almostdeadguy » Wed, Feb 05, 2025, 9:51 PM UTC

like_any_other wrote: post #86

almostdeadguy wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Dead links owned by the very companies being reported on. If a company lets their diversity report 404, why do you hold this against statisticians that gathered the data when it was live? Why should I trust data I can't verify? > You work with the data you have. Because the data isn't perfect, we should disregard it entirely and rely on your prejudice instead? Junk in, junk out. > The data is about the state of the…

> Why should I trust data I can't verify? Have you tried? Does archive.org have those urls? Are there other reports on those companies' diversity? Have you checked their mandatory government EEO-1 diversity reports [1]? It rather seems that you're nitpicking, looking for an excuse to ignore what by all accounts looks like someone's honest work. Do you have, for these companies, reports suggesting wildly different dem…

Who is actually making the claims here about these companies "achieving diversity"? Me? Do you want me to do your homework? It's quite easy to post specious data to support your specious claims on the internet. Quite easy to generate a desired reaction that way.

Re: Google kills diversity hiring targets

#89

Post by xnx » Wed, Feb 05, 2025, 9:53 PM UTC

skywhopper wrote: post #58

xnx wrote: post #26

Would be great to be more resources put in at the very start of the pipeline (e.g. early childhood education). It's very hard to "solve" "diversity" at the time of hiring when candidates have already had decades of disadvantage.

The fair way is to do so at all levels of the pipeline because it turns out people can overcome their past if given the support and resources to do so. But it’s far easier and cheaper to invest early on. All that said, real structural racism and sexism and other prejudices continues to exist, and so the pipeline will always be a problem. But a company like Google, which makes obscene profits every quarter, should be…

> should be doing far more at all stages to fight the effects of that prejudice

Google is a big company that can do a lot of things, but I wouldn't expect them to solve societal problems that plenty of other very profitable companies are making almost no effort in.

The models Google is developing may end up being the most impactful innovation in learning since the printing press.

Re: Google kills diversity hiring targets

#90

Post by chrislongss » Wed, Feb 05, 2025, 9:53 PM UTC

skywhopper wrote: post #75

chrislongss wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a fantastical speculation based on no evidence other than political bias. We do have evidence, though, that candidates had to go through performative hiring practices to prove that they support "diversity".

At Google? Where’s the evidence? Most DEI efforts come down to making sure you give a diverse candidate pool a chance to prove themselves instead of just hiring buddies that look and think and act exactly the same. That’s hardly “performative”.

Parent comment doesn't limit this to Google.