Forum Register Members Casino Live Posting Feed Garage Arcade Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   The Chicago Garage > General Discussion > On Topic

View Poll Results: Do you agree or disagree with the message of the manifesto?
No, I do not. 1 11.11%
Yes, I do. 8 88.89%
Unwilling to take a side. 0 0%
Voters: 9. You may not vote on this poll

User Tag List

Like Tree84Likes

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 08-06-2017, 11:06 AM   #1
Nemo me impune lacessit
 
Eagle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Woodsticks, IL
Posts: 62,465
Casino cash: $169617200
15.25 per day
Default Google engineer's "anti-diversity" manifesto

deadspin-quote-carrot-aligned-w-bgr-2<\/title><path d="M10,3.5l3-3,3,3Z" style="fill:%23fff;stroke:%23fff"/><path d="M0,3.5H10l3-3,3,3H26" style="fill:none;stroke:%231b3a4d"/><\/svg>')}.f_branding_on.blog-group-deadspin .editor-inner.post-content .pu

Scrolling through my Google news feed today and I see this article go by. I read it and I'm curious how TCG feels about this topic.

If you've got time for a little reading, please post up with your thoughts. I'll hold my personal thoughts for now until some others speak up as to not set any tone in this discussion.

Rambling off a few tags for people who seem to like engaging in these kinds of discussions:
@sickmint79 @Mike K @Mr_Roboto @BADAZZTEALCOBRA @GLADIATOR @ragingclue @jason05gt @Flyn @willizm @Senor Deplorable @Chester Copperpot @Yaj Yak @Fish
__________________
2019 RAM 1500 Limited 4x4 CCLB
2008 BMW 535i - MHD tuned
2004 BMW 330xi - kids cruiser
2004 VW New Beetle 2.0
2018 KTM 500 EXC-F
2018 Skidoo Renegade Backcountry X 850
2015 Polaris Indy SP 800
Eagle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2017, 11:07 AM   #2
 
Mook's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Elgin
Posts: 158,693
Casino cash: $76427000
36.24 per day
Default

Cliffs?
__________________
- TCG Owner & Operator -
We're in the Google Play and iOS App stores!

Mook is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2017, 11:08 AM   #3
Nemo me impune lacessit
 
Eagle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Woodsticks, IL
Posts: 62,465
Casino cash: $169617200
15.25 per day
Default

Just by writing cliffs I think I'd add bias.
Eagle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2017, 11:17 AM   #4
Nemo me impune lacessit
 
Eagle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Woodsticks, IL
Posts: 62,465
Casino cash: $169617200
15.25 per day
Default

I suppose I can try. The manifesto argues that Google's programs are over-playing diversity programs and therefore discriminating against the groups opposite of those they claim to be working to invest in - all while ignoring biological strengths and weaknesses of each group.
Eagle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2017, 11:20 AM   #5
Are you not entertained?
 
GLADIATOR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: New Lenox IL
Posts: 20,327
Casino cash: $38194200
3.68 per day
Default

Are you talking about the supposed psychological difference between males and females or the ability to speak up within a company without blacklisting yourself?
GLADIATOR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2017, 01:05 PM   #6
I Drink Your Milkshake
 
sickmint79's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: grayslake
Posts: 17,934
Casino cash: $107667416
4.38 per day
Default

i have seen the posts about this but have not read it. i skimmed a good chunk of it here. there's probably some generalizations or some cherry picking of the author's own views and biases and none of us here know what it's actually like to work in google and most of us don't know what it's like to work as a woman. so it's hard to say how 'bad' or 'suboptimal' their diversity policies may effect people or the company.

i would think in most young/tech companies that there would not be all that much bias. i have never asked my female coworkers how they felt, but my initial career ages 21-35 was all in major consulting firms at major corporations. afaik no diversity 'goal' was purposely sought, i worked with women, indians, muslims, gays, etc. overall everyone was pretty good to great, i think we were all treated, compensated, and promoted fairly.

i did have 2 circumstances where i wrote my boss about how 2 coworkers were not great. one was going to be sent out as another me to a place i was consulting. another was a peer, to be a team lead for a team i was leaving. both were technical roles. i did not trust either in the role, and both were hired by my boss, which meant it took even more of a desire on my side for me to point out i thought they were poor fits to him in the roles or potentially even the company. i could provide specific examples to this day of that being the case though. the first one was supposed to be helping me do some internal reporting at the company - where i actually had access to our compensation, and where i also found she made more than me. her only suggestions for this reporting were terrible design proposals, so i found this really frustrating.

they both happened to be women, but i don't think being women had anything to do with it. i worked with plenty of other women who did technical jobs and who i would trust and think of as badasses.

i wouldn't message them on facebook but i'd be curious to grab a beer with them now and ask them what they think of the climate today and their experience there though.

there's lots of versions of this woman giving her talk but a friend posted it recently. i only watched part of it myself.



nonetheless one of the things i recalled was about her giving a speech at a conference somewhere, and afterwards, guys asking her stuff about how to meet women. which of course no one would ever ask any of us the opposite were we to be invited to give a speech on some topic somewhere. i can't imagine how frustrating and insulting it would be to be a woman and have a brain that people just ignored.

so i suppose this is a little rambling aside from the google note head on. i am interested to see the ultimate evidence and results from the lawsuit at google. some of the articles i've briefly glanced at make it sound like there's smoking gun evidence. i have a hard time believing there is discriminatory compensation, although discriminatory promotion would seem a lot more likely.

is google internally overly PC to their detriment? i can't really say. sans environment and bias would i expect computer scientists, mechanics, and construction workers to be split 50/50 men/women? absolutely not, i think that's a completely ridiculous assertion. would more women being in traditionally "male jobs"? sure.

the 'manifesto' notes:

* Extreme: all disparities in representation are due to oppression
* Authoritarian: we should discriminate to correct for this oppression

i can't say i would agree with policies that had these ideas at their core.
__________________
http://www.pointmeby.com

2013 BRZ
Stoptech 328mm BBK.Project Mu999.RBF 600.RCE Tarmac 2 Coils.Whiteline KCA326/KCA434/KSR210/W0509/KDT922/W63414.Velox camber plates
JDL Overpipe + Catted Front Pipe.Tomei Type-60S.Radium catch cans.245 RS4s.Koyo Radiator.STi motor+trans mounts
FXT Oil Cooler.SPC LCA.Airaid intake.Zeek snorkel.DL Type II Diffuser.ecutek flex fuel tune.Swaintech coated JDL EL Header
sickmint79 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2017, 05:44 PM   #7
Doing the jobs nobody wants to
 
Mr_Roboto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Joliet
Posts: 11,082
Casino cash: $17518000
4.16 per day
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GLADIATOR View Post
Are you talking about the supposed psychological difference between males and females or the ability to speak up within a company without blacklisting yourself?
I think both honestly. Women have some skills mentally that make them a great fit for programming, some others not as much. That's just like men though tbh, each and every employee you ever hire has trade offs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sickmint79 View Post
i have seen the posts about this but have not read it. i skimmed a good chunk of it here. there's probably some generalizations or some cherry picking of the author's own views and biases and none of us here know what it's actually like to work in google and most of us don't know what it's like to work as a woman. so it's hard to say how 'bad' or 'suboptimal' their diversity policies may effect people or the company.

i would think in most young/tech companies that there would not be all that much bias. i have never asked my female coworkers how they felt, but my initial career ages 21-35 was all in major consulting firms at major corporations. afaik no diversity 'goal' was purposely sought, i worked with women, indians, muslims, gays, etc. overall everyone was pretty good to great, i think we were all treated, compensated, and promoted fairly.

i did have 2 circumstances where i wrote my boss about how 2 coworkers were not great. one was going to be sent out as another me to a place i was consulting. another was a peer, to be a team lead for a team i was leaving. both were technical roles. i did not trust either in the role, and both were hired by my boss, which meant it took even more of a desire on my side for me to point out i thought they were poor fits to him in the roles or potentially even the company. i could provide specific examples to this day of that being the case though. the first one was supposed to be helping me do some internal reporting at the company - where i actually had access to our compensation, and where i also found she made more than me. her only suggestions for this reporting were terrible design proposals, so i found this really frustrating.

they both happened to be women, but i don't think being women had anything to do with it. i worked with plenty of other women who did technical jobs and who i would trust and think of as badasses.
What I would be curious about is if the process were any better, worse or indifferent to re mediating the issue of their qualifications in their respective positions.

I believe gender and race discrimination are legit issues in a work place (quite frankly, my wife had a nasty bout of this with predatory cover up and investigative practices at her last job guess which demographics didn't get fired) but she's also had it used as a cudgel against her trying to rid previous organizations of bad people. I believe that to be far more common than actual discrimination IMO. That said I wonder how many times the "token white guy" gets fired to keep EEOC or whoever off a company's asses.

Something else I have always wondered about is whether or not "Women in STEM" is designed not to make the labor market equal but rather to put women in positions traditionally held by men for "72 cents on the dollar." If you believe the idea of wage gap this is unto its self not implausible. The biggest drivers of these concepts are in many cases also some of the largest users and advocates of H1B Visas, which they also use to debase the labor market. The more people you have in a labor market the less value that labor has. Cases like this make it far more believable in my opinion.

Google and Apple Settle Class-Action Lawsuit Alleging Wage Fixing | Time.com

That said, anything that involves a major corporation it is a safe premise to bet on the $$$ in many if not most cases. Google would sell their principles in a heart beat (and have) if they thought it would make them enough cash. Afterall, "don't be evil" right?

I will come back to this after I score some time to read the 10 pages of text they have. Just haven't gotten there yet.

ED:I also agree that the focus on diversity of demographics can be at the expense of diversity of thought. Having a diverse set of thoughts around to force open minded thinking is important especially when it comes to engineering and design related positions. Too many people let their minds get inflexible philosophically.
Eagle and ragingclue like this.
Mr_Roboto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2017, 05:50 PM   #8
Nemo me impune lacessit
 
Eagle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Woodsticks, IL
Posts: 62,465
Casino cash: $169617200
15.25 per day
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sickmint79 View Post
i have seen the posts about this but have not read it. i skimmed a good chunk of it here. there's probably some generalizations or some cherry picking of the author's own views and biases and none of us here know what it's actually like to work in google and most of us don't know what it's like to work as a woman. so it's hard to say how 'bad' or 'suboptimal' their diversity policies may effect people or the company.
I just want to point out the manifesto was written by a man.

He seems to be arguing that policy meant to prop up.... err.... advance protected status groups is adversely impacting the rest of the population and goes about trying to explain his point.
Eagle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2017, 06:02 PM   #9
Nemo me impune lacessit
 
Eagle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Woodsticks, IL
Posts: 62,465
Casino cash: $169617200
15.25 per day
Default

This seems to be talking about price fixing salaries by refusing to hire talent from peer companies who agreed not to in some sort of secret treaty of sorts... nothing to really do with diversity?

Quote:
ED:I also agree that the focus on diversity of demographics can be at the expense of diversity of thought. Having a diverse set of thoughts around to force open minded thinking is important especially when it comes to engineering and design related positions. Too many people let their minds get inflexible philosophically.
The author goes out of his way to state that he believes in diversity and understands its benefits, however, tries to make the point that there is a force in Google that is trying too hard to achieve equality and equal ratios of all things diverse which is having adverse affect on those not included in the programs meant to boost their diversity rates.
Eagle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2017, 06:31 PM   #10
I Drink Your Milkshake
 
sickmint79's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: grayslake
Posts: 17,934
Casino cash: $107667416
4.38 per day
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr_Roboto View Post
I think both honestly. Women have some skills mentally that make them a great fit for programming, some others not as much. That's just like men though tbh, each and every employee you ever hire has trade offs.



What I would be curious about is if the process were any better, worse or indifferent to re mediating the issue of their qualifications in their respective positions.

I believe gender and race discrimination are legit issues in a work place (quite frankly, my wife had a nasty bout of this with predatory cover up and investigative practices at her last job guess which demographics didn't get fired) but she's also had it used as a cudgel against her trying to rid previous organizations of bad people. I believe that to be far more common than actual discrimination IMO. That said I wonder how many times the "token white guy" gets fired to keep EEOC or whoever off a company's asses.
how often have you actually seen something like that? i really rarely see anyone get fired. people act like sans union people get fired all the time, and sure, they do, at mcdonald's... and i guess i don't know how it is at smaller companies, but the f100 f500 companies i've bounced around in, it seems like people are more scared to fire anybody than anything else. you need plenty of justification for it, at least if they are in any kind of reasonable financial health. if they are in big trouble and firing large swaths of people i don't think they are giving any shits about whether it's the white guy or not. both the women in my comments above parted from the company 'mutually' within a year.

Quote:
Something else I have always wondered about is whether or not "Women in STEM" is designed not to make the labor market equal but rather to put women in positions traditionally held by men for "72 cents on the dollar." If you believe the idea of wage gap this is unto its self not implausible. The biggest drivers of these concepts are in many cases also some of the largest users and advocates of H1B Visas, which they also use to debase the labor market. The more people you have in a labor market the less value that labor has. Cases like this make it far more believable in my opinion.

Google and Apple Settle Class-Action Lawsuit Alleging Wage Fixing | Time.com
i'm confused as to the above comments particularly the part about women and wage gaps. the lawsuit was about collusion and no poaching policies specifically to suppress wages for top talent at the big mega players for sure. h1b's are a mix of getting talent for cheap or getting good talent at all i think, depending on their roles. i can't say i have encountered many h1b people at least to my knowledge. have you? what do/did they do?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eagle View Post
I just want to point out the manifesto was written by a man.

He seems to be arguing that policy meant to prop up.... err.... advance protected status groups is adversely impacting the rest of the population and goes about trying to explain his point.
yes... although a lot of things i passively saw on facebook seemed to portray the thing as 'girls aren't as good at boys at computerz cuz biology'
sickmint79 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2017, 07:11 PM   #11
Doing the jobs nobody wants to
 
Mr_Roboto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Joliet
Posts: 11,082
Casino cash: $17518000
4.16 per day
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eagle View Post
This seems to be talking about price fixing salaries by refusing to hire talent from peer companies who agreed not to in some sort of secret treaty of sorts... nothing to really do with diversity?
I'm talking about price fixing on a macro level. Getting a group of people into a business that they're not in as of now increases the labor pool, and therefore makes it more of an employer's market. Although it can have altruistic intentions it can also be very profit motivated IMO.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eagle View Post
The author goes out of his way to state that he believes in diversity and understands its benefits, however, tries to make the point that there is a force in Google that is trying too hard to achieve equality and equal ratios of all things diverse which is having adverse affect on those not included in the programs meant to boost their diversity rates.
Overcompensation is a quite plausible issue. Keep in mind that IMO the STEM initiatives above have limited success as of now, and will take years to feel the effects of if not decades. Because of this, if you're trying to very aggressively hire X or Y demographic vs those qualified, you're going to get a substandard quality of employee vs getting the smartest person for the job regradless of what boxes they check on your EEOC surveys.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sickmint79 View Post
how often have you actually seen something like that? i really rarely see anyone get fired. people act like sans union people get fired all the time, and sure, they do, at mcdonald's... and i guess i don't know how it is at smaller companies, but the f100 f500 companies i've bounced around in, it seems like people are more scared to fire anybody than anything else. you need plenty of justification for it, at least if they are in any kind of reasonable financial health. if they are in big trouble and firing large swaths of people i don't think they are giving any shits about whether it's the white guy or not. both the women in my comments above parted from the company 'mutually' within a year.
Personally, I haven't been on either end of it as far as I know thankfully. The only one I would even suspect of that would be a job I got an offer for from Exelon that was rescinded due to a supposed (and IMO bullshit) medical reason. See "token white guy" remark. That said, I would love to see some boards layoff emails about how they choose who to lay off. I wouldn't be surprised if keeping the EEOC at bay was part of it.

That said, my wife has been on both sides of it. She's had people fire EEOC complaints to save their asses, had it happen to managers around her (even ones she was replacing) and she's also received EEOC rulings in favor of her being discriminated against. My wife even had an EEOC complaint that went nowhere because the manager in question was sleeping with the person who was doing the investigation. Seriously.

I'm not sure that it happens as much in the IT world. I would certainly think it would be kept a lot the fuck quieter. Then again a great deal of the companies I've worked for you have to be a huge, chronic fuck up to even get on the radar much less fired. It sucks, and if anything I believe the difficulty in firing people is a down side of such systems. That said, I would be hard pressed on whether using the EEOC as a cudgel or political clout would be more likely to save your ass. I would lean towards political clout TBH.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sickmint79 View Post
i'm confused as to the above comments particularly the part about women and wage gaps. the lawsuit was about collusion and no poaching policies specifically to suppress wages for top talent at the big mega players for sure. h1b's are a mix of getting talent for cheap or getting good talent at all i think, depending on their roles. i can't say i have encountered many h1b people at least to my knowledge. have you? what do/did they do?

yes... although a lot of things i passively saw on facebook seemed to portray the thing as 'girls aren't as good at boys at computerz cuz biology'
See what I said about Eagle's remark. I've worked with a lot of people who's origins are "out of state" This can really go either direction for a couple reasons. If they're more permanent in US employees, they'll be awesome in many cases. If they're here to work a year, learn the job of the person they are replacing and go back to wherever to do their jobs they're going to be a mixed bag.

I've seen entire shops laid off to just put in H1B workers at $60K/year. If you outsource all your shit like that IMO there's not much emphasis on quality (you lose tribal knowledge shitcanning your long term staff esp the top tier ones) and in turn you aren't looking for "top tier" out of state employees but rather adequate ones.

As backwards as it sounds at face value, the idea of Trump wanting to have skilled people with dynamic job skills be the primary populations immigrating in to the US I think it would actually be good for employees in my industry if it's coupled with reduced emphasis on H1Bs. The reason is that if those people are citizens they are far less susceptible to abuse at the hands of their employers that debase wages of people like you or I. Perhaps more important, I believe those people will ultimately work to create more opportunity by strengthening the US economy. One of the lesser talked about tricks the US has in its arsenal is we brain drain other countries. Yes we may educate a ton of people internationally but if we give them a chance at the golden ticket many if not most will say yes. This means we can have our pick of the best talent that will spur our innovation at the expense of other countries. I actually believe this is part of the issue with Mexico. Those who would ultimately have the will to change it via soft or hard political change are where? Not in Mexico, but rather in the US.
Mr_Roboto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2017, 07:18 PM   #12
Go ahead. I'll catch up.
 
Flyn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Selling homes on the Gulf Coast of Florida
Posts: 44,716
Casino cash: $220471900
8.05 per day
Default

Any manifesto should have merit as the first and most important of its criteria for choosing a candidate, promoting and compensating. Do that and the rest of the manifesto doesn't matter as much.
Flyn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2017, 08:34 PM   #13
I Drink Your Milkshake
 
sickmint79's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: grayslake
Posts: 17,934
Casino cash: $107667416
4.38 per day
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr_Roboto View Post
See what I said about Eagle's remark.
Quote:
I'm talking about price fixing on a macro level. Getting a group of people into a business that they're not in as of now increases the labor pool, and therefore makes it more of an employer's market. Although it can have altruistic intentions it can also be very profit motivated IMO.
i'm confused at sticking these together. the price fixing, or no hire collusion, is certainly a wage suppressor for the competing talent in this space.

the desire for more women in STEM, if that's what you mean here, i think is simply an attempt for greater diversity. there is a talent gap for tech skills particularly the real hot high end stuff anyway. of course the tried and true method of attracting more talented boys and girls is throwing more money at them. i would hope anything trying to help women in the field is more along the lines of trying to appeal to women at younger ages to have an interest in these fields and make them more approachable, rather than give someone less qualified a job over someone else because they have tits vs. a peen.


Quote:
I've worked with a lot of people who's origins are "out of state" This can really go either direction for a couple reasons. If they're more permanent in US employees, they'll be awesome in many cases. If they're here to work a year, learn the job of the person they are replacing and go back to wherever to do their jobs they're going to be a mixed bag.

I've seen entire shops laid off to just put in H1B workers at $60K/year. If you outsource all your shit like that IMO there's not much emphasis on quality (you lose tribal knowledge shitcanning your long term staff esp the top tier ones) and in turn you aren't looking for "top tier" out of state employees but rather adequate ones.
but h1b are usually for more talented, and expensive, people. especially for direct hires by companies. it seems the smaller population, less easily reported on, is h1bs for 3rd party contractor labor that does come to the US for some time and is lower skilled and paid more cheaply - but a lot of h1b people are paid well and comparably with US employees. many of them would also like to stay in the US as well, and become citizens here. you certainly don't need to go through any kind of h1b phase or steps to outsource jobs abroad, particularly the lower skilled operations.

there does certainly appear to be a lot of various types of fraud around this program.
H1B visa issue not quiet in US, Trump team cracking the whip on fraud and abuse

Quote:
As backwards as it sounds at face value, the idea of Trump wanting to have skilled people with dynamic job skills be the primary populations immigrating in to the US I think it would actually be good for employees in my industry if it's coupled with reduced emphasis on H1Bs. The reason is that if those people are citizens they are far less susceptible to abuse at the hands of their employers that debase wages of people like you or I. Perhaps more important, I believe those people will ultimately work to create more opportunity by strengthening the US economy. One of the lesser talked about tricks the US has in its arsenal is we brain drain other countries. Yes we may educate a ton of people internationally but if we give them a chance at the golden ticket many if not most will say yes. This means we can have our pick of the best talent that will spur our innovation at the expense of other countries. I actually believe this is part of the issue with Mexico. Those who would ultimately have the will to change it via soft or hard political change are where? Not in Mexico, but rather in the US.
certainly it does others no benefit when the brain drain ends up here i agree. we are wandering quite a bit from the original post here i suppose as well.

here's a recent-ish article with some interesting notes: Tech

"The study adds to similar recent results published by Glassdoor, who found last November that the average female programmer made nearly 30% less than her male counterpart."

i don't trust statements like this as it certainly leaves out the details, as a programmer is not a programmer and it really matters what language and what they are working on.

"As the filmmaker Robin Hauser Reynolds highlighted in the 2013 documentary CODE: Debugging the Gender Gap, women made up a much greater proportion of computer science graduates thirty years ago—37%, compared to just 14% in 2013."

"NPR’s Planet Money argued in a 2014 report that that decline, starting in the mid-1980s, coincided with the aggressive marketing of home computers to young boys. That both helped computers become more culturally associated with men, and gave young women relatively less access to the tools to learn computer science from a young age."

these are some interesting points simply about the number of women who have chosen to enter the field at all.
sickmint79 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2017, 09:01 PM   #14
Doing the jobs nobody wants to
 
Mr_Roboto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Joliet
Posts: 11,082
Casino cash: $17518000
4.16 per day
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sickmint79 View Post
i'm confused at sticking these together. the price fixing, or no hire collusion, is certainly a wage suppressor for the competing talent in this space.

the desire for more women in STEM, if that's what you mean here, i think is simply an attempt for greater diversity. there is a talent gap for tech skills particularly the real hot high end stuff anyway. of course the tried and true method of attracting more talented boys and girls is throwing more money at them. i would hope anything trying to help women in the field is more along the lines of trying to appeal to women at younger ages to have an interest in these fields and make them more approachable, rather than give someone less qualified a job over someone else because they have tits vs. a peen.




but h1b are usually for more talented, and expensive, people. especially for direct hires by companies. it seems the smaller population, less easily reported on, is h1bs for 3rd party contractor labor that does come to the US for some time and is lower skilled and paid more cheaply - but a lot of h1b people are paid well and comparably with US employees. many of them would also like to stay in the US as well, and become citizens here. you certainly don't need to go through any kind of h1b phase or steps to outsource jobs abroad, particularly the lower skilled operations.

there does certainly appear to be a lot of various types of fraud around this program.
H1B visa issue not quiet in US, Trump team cracking the whip on fraud and abuse



certainly it does others no benefit when the brain drain ends up here i agree. we are wandering quite a bit from the original post here i suppose as well.

here's a recent-ish article with some interesting notes: Tech

"The study adds to similar recent results published by Glassdoor, who found last November that the average female programmer made nearly 30% less than her male counterpart."

i don't trust statements like this as it certainly leaves out the details, as a programmer is not a programmer and it really matters what language and what they are working on.

"As the filmmaker Robin Hauser Reynolds highlighted in the 2013 documentary CODE: Debugging the Gender Gap, women made up a much greater proportion of computer science graduates thirty years ago—37%, compared to just 14% in 2013."

"NPR’s Planet Money argued in a 2014 report that that decline, starting in the mid-1980s, coincided with the aggressive marketing of home computers to young boys. That both helped computers become more culturally associated with men, and gave young women relatively less access to the tools to learn computer science from a young age."

these are some interesting points simply about the number of women who have chosen to enter the field at all.
In terms of H1B really? Here, read this. If you're in the 100K range in the IT industry esp in California area you've got some talents, but by no means are you the next Ritchie. Disney got into the same shit as Edison on this. It's not that there weren't workers there, it's that there weren't workers there who would do it for the price they wanted so they got H1Bs instead. I've seen this in several shops during my time as a CE with EMC. They'd shitcan the whole staff and bring in outsourced people from another country. Tata also got in trouble for keeping bonuses that were meant for employees and lost a law suit over it. Some of them get treated as virtual slaves in the US due to the threat of getting their status pulled. Based on my experiences in the industry, I have little to no doubt that is real.

New Data Show How Firms Like Infosys and Tata Abuse the H-1B Program | Economic Policy Institute

In terms of Women in tech, you kind of had 2 and 2 in your statement without putting the association together. People like Google and Apple and Microsoft get to present themselves as socially correct while preparing a future work force that they can get to work for less money if the theory of wage gaps are correct. They also get to increase the number of people in the labor pool which would in turn decrease prices. Why wouldn't they want a larger labor pool to choose from?
Mr_Roboto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2017, 06:54 AM   #15
Harbor Master
 
Yaj Yak's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 86,287
Casino cash: $128059000
19.71 per day
Default

Quote:
My concrete suggestions are to:
De-moralize diversity.

As soon as we start to moralize an issue, we stop thinking about it in terms of costs and benefits, dismiss anyone that disagrees as immoral, and harshly punish those we see as villains to protect the “victims.”
Stop alienating conservatives.

Viewpoint diversity is arguably the most important type of diversity and political orientation is one of the most fundamental and significant ways in which people view things differently.
In highly progressive environments, conservatives are a minority that feel like they need to stay in the closet to avoid open hostility. We should empower those with different ideologies to be able to express themselves.
Alienating conservatives is both non-inclusive and generally bad business because conservatives tend to be higher in conscientiousness, which is require for much of the drudgery and maintenance work characteristic of a mature company.
Confront Google’s biases.

I’ve mostly concentrated on how our biases cloud our thinking about diversity and inclusion, but our moral biases are farther reaching than that.
I would start by breaking down Googlegeist scores by political orientation and personality to give a fuller picture into how our biases are affecting our culture.
Stop restricting programs and classes to certain genders or races.

These discriminatory practices are both unfair and divisive. Instead focus on some of the non-discriminatory practices I outlined.
Have an open and honest discussion about the costs and benefits of our diversity programs.

Discriminating just to increase the representation of women in tech is as misguided and biased as mandating increases for women’s representation in the homeless, work-related and violent deaths, prisons, and school dropouts.
There’s currently very little transparency into the extend of our diversity programs which keeps it immune to criticism from those outside its ideological echo chamber.
These programs are highly politicized which further alienates non-progressives.
I realize that some of our programs may be precautions against government accusations of discrimination, but that can easily backfire since they incentivize illegal discrimination.
Focus on psychological safety, not just race/gender diversity.

We should focus on psychological safety, which has shown positive effects and should (hopefully) not lead to unfair discrimination.
We need psychological safety and shared values to gain the benefits of diversity
Having representative viewpoints is important for those designing and testing our products, but the benefits are less clear for those more removed from UX.
De-emphasize empathy.

I’ve heard several calls for increased empathy on diversity issues. While I strongly support trying to understand how and why people think the way they do, relying on affective empathy—feeling another’s pain—causes us to focus on anecdotes, favor individuals similar to us, and harbor other irrational and dangerous biases. Being emotionally unengaged helps us better reason about the facts.
Prioritize intention.

Our focus on microaggressions and other unintentional transgressions increases our sensitivity, which is not universally positive: sensitivity increases both our tendency to take offense and our self censorship, leading to authoritarian policies. Speaking up without the fear of being harshly judged is central to psychological safety, but these practices can remove that safety by judging unintentional transgressions.
Microaggression training incorrectly and dangerously equates speech with violence and isn’t backed by evidence.
Be open about the science of human nature.

Once we acknowledge that not all differences are socially constructed or due to discrimination, we open our eyes to a more accurate view of the human condition which is necessary if we actually want to solve problems.
Reconsider making Unconscious Bias training mandatory for promo committees.

We haven’t been able to measure any effect of our Unconscious Bias training and it has the potential for overcorrecting or backlash, especially if made mandatory.
Some of the suggested methods of the current training (v2.3) are likely useful, but the political bias of the presentation is clear from the factual inaccuracies and the examples shown.
Spend more time on the many other types of biases besides stereotypes. Stereotypes are much more accurate and responsive to new information than the training suggests (I’m not advocating for using stereotypes, I [sic] just pointing out the factual inaccuracy of what’s said in the training).
is it wrong that I agree with most of this?



especially this.
Quote:
In highly progressive environments, conservatives are a minority that feel like they need to stay in the closet to avoid open hostility. We should empower those with different ideologies to be able to express themselves.
I don't even view myself as too conservative either... but this I can relate to.
__________________
01 525i
01 turbo pricks
13 gas 3500hd cclb

Quote:
Originally Posted by Outlaw View Post
TCG: We pull vanity fair models in our F150’s because Tesla’s are unsafe.
Yaj Yak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2017, 06:56 AM   #16
Harbor Master
 
Yaj Yak's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 86,287
Casino cash: $128059000
19.71 per day
Default

Quote:
Voters: 2. You have already voted on this poll


pussies!
BADAZZTEALCOBRA likes this.
Yaj Yak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2017, 07:05 AM   #17
 
BADAZZTEALCOBRA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Streamwood
Posts: 19,275
Casino cash: $45139698
4.76 per day
Default

Holy Hell, I come into work and have a reading assignment from @Eagle !!!

Well, I'll get to reading that damn thing and hopefully have something to add to the discussion.
Eagle and ragingclue like this.
BADAZZTEALCOBRA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2017, 08:29 AM   #18
 
BADAZZTEALCOBRA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Streamwood
Posts: 19,275
Casino cash: $45139698
4.76 per day
Default

Well, just finished reading that novel and found myself agreeing with a majority of it.....

Then went on to the Response from Danielle who makes it sound like Google disagrees with it, followed by of course the comments making sure to say the person writing it is a sexist racist pig... SMH.

This was one of the biggest points of the manifesto, that we should be tolerant of everyone's thoughts no matter where they're coming from, but of course the person who wrote it was a man, likely a white male, so he's automatically a sexist racist scumbag.

People going straight in that direction just because they don't agree with someone else's viewpoint is going to start backfiring, and I'd say the selection of Donald Trump was the start of it.
BADAZZTEALCOBRA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2017, 08:29 AM   #19
You used to call me on my cell phone
 
Great White Drake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 4,430
Casino cash: $38038338
1.36 per day
Default

I agree. The strong cannot bring up the weak, the weak only bring the strong down. I'm also tired of pretending there's no differences between sexes/races. Yes, were different but that's not a bad thing. It's like admitting there's differences means you're a racist or sexist. On a larger level, it's a sign of a crumbling social structure when the truth is ridiculed.

Non of these groups or their movements are about equality at all. It's about power and being able to victimize yourself into a protected class to achieve power, money, or priveledge.
__________________
Great White Drake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2017, 08:35 AM   #20
 
BADAZZTEALCOBRA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Streamwood
Posts: 19,275
Casino cash: $45139698
4.76 per day
Default

The same people would likely look at our poll results so far and say of course we agree with it, we're a bunch of middle class white males.
BADAZZTEALCOBRA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2017, 08:42 AM   #21
You used to call me on my cell phone
 
Great White Drake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 4,430
Casino cash: $38038338
1.36 per day
Default

Diversity exists but has nothing to do with what's between your legs or color of your skin. Diversity exists in effort, work ethic, morals, values and I.Q.
Great White Drake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2017, 09:05 AM   #22
 
BADAZZTEALCOBRA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Streamwood
Posts: 19,275
Casino cash: $45139698
4.76 per day
Default

Then you get shit like this headline:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...rious-backlash

"Google staffers hostility towards affirmative action....."

So now just having a differing perspective means it's hostile? I saw nothing hostile in the manifesto that I can remember...

There are also people tweeting that they will leave the company if nothing is done about this manifesto... So the author will likely be fired I'm guessing. Way to be tolerant of other people's views.
BADAZZTEALCOBRA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2017, 09:22 AM   #23
 
Ryan02Stang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Mount Prospect
Posts: 9,570
Casino cash: $108200000
1.78 per day
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BADAZZTEALCOBRA View Post
The same people would likely look at our poll results so far and say of course we agree with it, we're privileged.
Fixed
Eagle and BADAZZTEALCOBRA like this.
__________________
2015 Ford Explorer Sport
2012 Lincoln MKS Ecoboost
2002 Mustang GT
Ryan02Stang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2017, 10:02 AM   #24
Nemo me impune lacessit
 
Eagle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Woodsticks, IL
Posts: 62,465
Casino cash: $169617200
15.25 per day
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Great White Drake View Post
Diversity exists but has nothing to do with what's between your legs or color of your skin. Diversity exists in effort, work ethic, morals, values and I.Q.
That's not entirely true, what's between your legs dictates how much testosterone you have in your system, which usually has a large impact on how your brain works.

Just saying.
Yaj Yak likes this.
Eagle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2017, 10:05 AM   #25
Nemo me impune lacessit
 
Eagle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Woodsticks, IL
Posts: 62,465
Casino cash: $169617200
15.25 per day
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BADAZZTEALCOBRA View Post
Then you get shit like this headline:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...rious-backlash

"Google staffers hostility towards affirmative action....."

So now just having a differing perspective means it's hostile? I saw nothing hostile in the manifesto that I can remember...

There are also people tweeting that they will leave the company if nothing is done about this manifesto... So the author will likely be fired I'm guessing. Way to be tolerant of other people's views.
I would not say there is anything blatantly hostile, but there are a handful of undertones present in the manifesto that could be easily questioned.
BADAZZTEALCOBRA likes this.
Eagle is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:53 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.0.6 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
no new posts