President Pushes For More Diversity In Tech

Joined
Aug 2, 2013
Messages
539
I've seen similar things with white men, including a thesis that was arguably plagiarized. Now he's a CTO. What's your point? The best technical people I've known are WASTED in management. Management is rarely made up of the technical masters.

Sorry, but these stories remind me of all of the food stamp recipient drives a late model Cadillac stories. Incompetent people (of all races and both sexes) get hired and some of them get promoted.

Absolutely, and that is all these initiatives do...further increase the variety of incentives to treat people unfairly, unequally, and dishonestly before, during, and after hiring them.
 

Gigus Fire

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Messages
2,275
Do you really think women and men approach life and problems the same way? That's not been my experience (in or out of the workplace). That doesn't mean women were illogical or whatever, just their approach and skillsets were different and generally complimented mine and the other men I worked with.
They wouldn't be the same person so no, they wouldn't approach life and problems the same way. Similarly two women won't approach life and problems the same way and neither will two men.
To make generalizations about how women approach things emotionally and men approach things in a more logical manner is a generalization and will not be true on an individual basis. Some may fit the stereotype yet others will not. Saying that a group of people will get different ideas based on the fact that the group makeup isn't homogeneous is a fallacy. This is why diversity will fail when put to the test. Focusing on the makeup of a group compared to making sure you have the best qualified candidates will result in a less quality group which has a higher chance of failure.
 

Yossarian22

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Apr 27, 2009
Messages
1,793
Diversify in what way? I'm surrounded by the UN in my IT shop. Indians, Asians, Pacific Islanders, white folks, black folks, men and women. We can't get much more diverse.

Some places supposedly aren't "diverse" enough. There are market forces at play and yeah, you'd probably have a hard time finding a woman who writes COBOL.

The problem with the whole diversity thing is that businesses are not pro-actively trying to prevent women and minorities into the workplace of their establishments but rather the question should be: "Why aren't minorities or women applying for said positions in company x?" There could possibly be a problem with management but I think that is not the usual case.

So as a result, you have people in ivory towers (the POTUS is pushing for this, has he ever worked in industry?) who interpret the situation wrong. Along with a very strong SJW/Feminist movement who want "privlege" in the opposite direction, namely, they don't want men to be hired anywhere. Some SJWs even call for the deaths of white males. :eek:

The gaming industry doesn't seem to have a problem with diversity. Neither do large companies like Microsoft, Texas Instruments, Apple, et cetera...

An ancedote: went to university career faire, special room of college assigned directly for Microsoft. All Indian students with two white guys with preliminary interviews being done there (CS dept. has conference rooms).
 

kac77

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
2,787
I love this hypothetical, sadly it doesn't exist and if you think otherwise you've clearly you've never interviewed for tech openings. I've interviewed hundreds of people and not once have I had a an opportunity to choose from equally qualified applicants. There have always been clear standouts and there have always been many WTF was this person thinking even applying for this job, much less make it past the phone screens.

Considering I'm pretty high up there let's just say that this happens more often that not. We don't really have to worry about diversity because it's not a problem where I work. So it usually comes down to personality. But interviewing people with the same credentials happens ALOT in IT.
 

Nicklebon

Gawd
Joined
May 22, 2006
Messages
814
Credentials != qualifications.
Credentials = the lies people put on a resume.
Qualifications = passing the tech interviews to get hired.
We've interviewed people that claim degrees in CS and CCNP certifications that didn't understand basic routing. So no, interviewing candidates with the same qualifications does not happen in my experience. Frankly, I wish it did as we are lucky to get even one qualified candidate.
 

twonunpackmule

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 27, 2005
Messages
1,668
Honestly, I think a lot of problems result in people not knowing their own worth. Most don't know how to write a resume and most don't know how to sell themselves on their strengths. A lot of people don't even know if they are qualified for the jobs they are even looking at. The language being used is different in a lot of ways to what typically is said outloud. It creates a barrier for new hires and people without the typical "training" to decypher the language.

I had to seek help from my mother to help me make sense out of the language being used to hire for government work. I come from a film background and worked almost 8 years in that field. Got tired of the freelance hustle for paychecks.
 

kac77

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
2,787
Credentials != qualifications.
Credentials = the lies people put on a resume.
Qualifications = passing the tech interviews to get hired.
We've interviewed people that claim degrees in CS and CCNP certifications that didn't understand basic routing. So no, interviewing candidates with the same qualifications does not happen in my experience. Frankly, I wish it did as we are lucky to get even one qualified candidate.
Um credentials can be qualifications for a job. Would you like me to provide the definition?

Sorry this notion that when you interview hundreds of people and no one is ever close to another in qualifications or credentials is just isn't true.
 

Revdarian

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 16, 2010
Messages
2,616
I really don't understand the "I don't see feminists pushing for more women in X field" argument.

You aren't going to find a single feminist who thinks any field should be all men or male dominated. Just because you think a job is shitty doesn't mean you should project your thoughts about that on feminists. Its not a gotcha, I'm sorry. I know you think you had one, but you don't.




They should actually be pushing for more Males on Social Sciences.


The disparity in Social Science is even bigger than it is in STEM, only thing is that it is pro Females.

Since Feminism by the pure definition is an Equality movement they should focus first on the most unequal fields first.

We all know that this won't happen, so, whatever.
 
Joined
Aug 2, 2013
Messages
539
Honestly, I think a lot of problems result in people not knowing their own worth. Most don't know how to write a resume and most don't know how to sell themselves on their strengths. A lot of people don't even know if they are qualified for the jobs they are even looking at. The language being used is different in a lot of ways to what typically is said outloud. It creates a barrier for new hires and people without the typical "training" to decypher the language.

I had to seek help from my mother to help me make sense out of the language being used to hire for government work. I come from a film background and worked almost 8 years in that field. Got tired of the freelance hustle for paychecks.

Maybe it was not this way a couple of decades or more ago, but now it's all about lying. The list of things on the minimum requirements (and let's not even talk about the "preferences" section) posted in job descriptions are so numerous and so specific to that exact job in that exact organization, essentially no one, except someone who has previously worked in that exact job in that exact organization, actually meets the listed "minimum requirements."

Who gets hired? Whoever schmoozes and lies the most during all the interviews. Now maybe that is the definition of "selling yourself" in the modern job market, but let's not sugar coat it.
 

PersonalJ

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 2, 2010
Messages
1,795
Maybe it was not this way a couple of decades or more ago, but now it's all about lying. The list of things on the minimum requirements (and let's not even talk about the "preferences" section) posted in job descriptions are so numerous and so specific to that exact job in that exact organization, essentially no one, except someone who has previously worked in that exact job in that exact organization, actually meets the listed "minimum requirements."

Who gets hired? Whoever schmoozes and lies the most during all the interviews. Now maybe that is the definition of "selling yourself" in the modern job market, but let's not sugar coat it.

No, software development interviews at quality companies are mostly quantitative data structure and algorithm questions.
 

Nicklebon

Gawd
Joined
May 22, 2006
Messages
814
Um credentials can be qualifications for a job. Would you like me to provide the definition?

Sorry this notion that when you interview hundreds of people and no one is ever close to another in qualifications or credentials is just isn't true.

Clearly you work in my HR group. People like you are why I've had to interview obviously unqualified candidates wasting my time and the time of my leads. At least in the network security business qualified candidates are few are far between. Twenty years in the field, most of it with a fortune 100 company, and I've yet to have had the opportunity to fret between two equally qualified applicants. The process was usually something akin to:

We get between 5 and 10 candidates that have been phone screened by HR of those 2 to 3 will have resume issues leaving the rest to be interviewed. More often than not we would to go through this cycle 2 to 5 times before we would get a successful interview. This is the primary reason we switched almost exclusively to right to hire contractors. Screening and interviewing weak applicants simply took too much time.
 

maverikv

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 31, 2003
Messages
1,992
They should actually be pushing for more Males on Social Sciences.


The disparity in Social Science is even bigger than it is in STEM, only thing is that it is pro Females.

Since Feminism by the pure definition is an Equality movement they should focus first on the most unequal fields first.

We all know that this won't happen, so, whatever.

Your proposal is . . . that feminists argue for less women in a handful of fields as their top priority? How drunk are you right now?
 
Joined
Aug 2, 2013
Messages
539
We get between 5 and 10 candidates that have been phone screened by HR of those 2 to 3 will have resume issues leaving the rest to be interviewed. More often than not we would to go through this cycle 2 to 5 times before we would get a successful interview. This is the primary reason we switched almost exclusively to right to hire contractors. Screening and interviewing weak applicants simply took too much time.

Not saying this is necessarily your department's fault, but it is definitely the fault of someone in the company's management, whether on the tech side or business side, or both. A good company will continuously bring in entry-level candidates and train them from the ground up, making sure any talent shortages are non-critical and only for a short period. And if the company has trouble attracting new entry-level talent and/or keeping that talent after training them, that says something about the company.
 

jimmyb

2[H]4U
Joined
May 24, 2006
Messages
3,165
The problem with the whole diversity thing is that businesses are not pro-actively trying to prevent women and minorities into the workplace of their establishments but rather the question should be: "Why aren't minorities or women applying for said positions in company x?"

That is literally what these programs are attempting to address. These companies are not committing to hiring under qualified employees, despite the hysteria on these message boards.
 

Morlock

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 8, 2012
Messages
505
How 'bout some "diversity" in the Federal Reserve chairmanship while we're at it?
 

Nytegard

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 8, 2004
Messages
3,603
Not saying this is necessarily your department's fault, but it is definitely the fault of someone in the company's management, whether on the tech side or business side, or both. A good company will continuously bring in entry-level candidates and train them from the ground up, making sure any talent shortages are non-critical and only for a short period. And if the company has trouble attracting new entry-level talent and/or keeping that talent after training them, that says something about the company.

The tech industry in my opinion is the absolute worst when it comes to hiring new people. Even great companies are pretty terrible at best. In my opinion, there's a reason why the interviewing process changes every few years. Either asking puzzles which have no relevance to the position, or algorithms which have no relevance to the position, or people asking syntax questions which can easily be googled, or white boarding to put the person in an awkward spot to see how they'd handle pressure that will never appear in that position, or asking questions you know a person couldn't answer so you can feel superior to the candidate, the list goes on and on.

I wouldn't say the company is at fault for hiring terrible people, but the company is responsible for having terrible interviewers who really should not be deciding who to hire.
 

kac77

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
2,787
Clearly you work in my HR group. People like you are why I've had to interview obviously unqualified candidates wasting my time and the time of my leads. At least in the network security business qualified candidates are few are far between. Twenty years in the field, most of it with a fortune 100 company, and I've yet to have had the opportunity to fret between two equally qualified applicants. The process was usually something akin to:

Clearly you're posting a strawman argument. Did i say that the number of qualified candidates are in abundance for network security? Nope. How about instead of you trying to figure out where I fit in your group how about you invest in some reading glasses, or maybe a class on logic and reason? Both would be helpful I think.
 

nightfly

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 7, 2011
Messages
3,287
Men make up the vast majority of construction jobs and high risk work. Hence why 93% of all workplace deaths are men. Where is the outcry to make that number equal? Where is the outcry for more men to be in fields dominated by woman?
We must start killing more women in the workplace to even out this terrible inequality; do we get to choose the ones that get to die? I can think of a few that are really worthless not just as employees but as human beings as well.
Prostitution is a field almost entirely female. And because there are so few heterosexual male whores, women must start hiring male prostitutes to even things out. Of course, to prevent age discrimination, the new male prostitute hires will mostly be older straight guys because the few that exist are already all younger than 30 and gay. And just like they lowered the requirements so women could become firefighters, they'll have to lower the requirements so I can be a male whore. Now suppose I'm five foot three and weigh 280, with a 4 inch pecker. Where do I apply for my new affirmative action job? I knew there'd be a job that would get me to reconsider retiring. I just knew it.
 

sliverjazz

Gawd
Joined
Jun 9, 2004
Messages
747
This "White privilege" bullshit is a perfect example of how the power trippers have misused the word "privilege" and changed its meaning from getting something for free(like preferences in school, jobs, housing, etc) to simply being born with good genes. It's not the government's job to make people fair or equal, it's simply to defend the borders and maintain a minimal framework for commerce.
 

madcap magician

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 12, 2003
Messages
328
This has to do with income equality which has been a corner stone of this president's agenda (and the Democratic Party) for a while now. Nothing new here.
 

heatlesssun

Extremely [H]
Joined
Nov 5, 2005
Messages
44,154
This "White privilege" bullshit is a perfect example of how the power trippers have misused the word "privilege" and changed its meaning from getting something for free(like preferences in school, jobs, housing, etc) to simply being born with good genes. It's not the government's job to make people fair or equal, it's simply to defend the borders and maintain a minimal framework for commerce.

This basic argument has been used has been for centuries against even basic enfranchisement, like ending slavery or Jim Crow. This fight has always been by some, no matter the issue at hand, as "something for nothing".
 

madcap magician

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 12, 2003
Messages
328
Careful people. You'll be labelled a racist and woman hater for stating your opinion even if it's based in fact.
 

heatlesssun

Extremely [H]
Joined
Nov 5, 2005
Messages
44,154
Careful people. You'll be labelled a racist and woman hater for stating your opinion even if it's based in fact.

There have been many things stated as "fact" when it comes to these issues that weren't so much. Like the "fact" that only the black race was suited to farm the fields in the subtropical environment of the South.
 

madcap magician

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 12, 2003
Messages
328
There have been many things stated as "fact" when it comes to these issues that weren't so much. Like the "fact" that only the black race was suited to farm the fields in the subtropical environment of the South.

150 years ago. Let it go man. We elected a black president for crying out loud.

This is where you say, "yea but there is racism and oppression in the world still". And I agree yes, but surely there is less racism than 30 years ago? Then you say, " facts don't show that". Sigh.
 

heatlesssun

Extremely [H]
Joined
Nov 5, 2005
Messages
44,154
150 years ago. Let it go man. We elected a black president for crying out loud.

This is where you say, "yea but there is racism and oppression in the world still". And I agree yes, but surely there is less racism than 30 years ago? Then you say, " facts don't show that". Sigh.

There's nothing to let go. I was simply pointing out that "facts" in this matter are often not facts and meant to support ulterior motives. As far as the reduction of racism, having been raised by parents that lived under Jim Crow, well duh. Anyone that thinks that race relations are at some kind of all time low are just making it up and have NO idea what it's been like and not too long ago.
 

pothb

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 24, 2007
Messages
4,997
Oh puhleeze. The biggest idiot I worked with was a white male. He didn't do shit and slept all the time. It took us FOREVER to get rid of him. It wasn't even a close call. The least competent person on our team after him was several orders of magnitude better, and we had a lot of women and a lot of African Americans.

Honestly, if you work with a bunch of people who suck, then leave. If you can't, then maybe you're not that good either.

I've worked with a number of people who are good, and a number of people who are outright idiots. I don't get why you're just attacking me, but what I said was that, if you mandate that to be hired they have to fill a quota, better more qualified people can't get hired because of it.

Oh, you have a white male that sucked. So, what? People vary. But if you had a group full of blacks and hispanics. And it was mandated that a white male HAD to be hired because of diversity, then you're situation would be relevant.
 
D

Deleted member 108676

Guest
They told you that?

No. But when I went in for the 2nd interview a hispanic lady went in before me. When she came out she was smiling and as she walked off said "good luck getting the job" and then laughed.

I went in, did my interview, and was told it would take no less than 9 days to hear back because since it was a State position there was more red tape they had to go through before making the hire. I understood that 100%.

45 minutes later I got called saying I didn't get the job.

Making that kind of statement shows a lot of your character. I am very sure there were other factors that the decisions were based on. Unless they specifically told you that, then it really just sounds like you are bitter and not used to job seeking. There will be times you get jobs and others will feel that they were unfairly cut from the pick list as there will be moments you feel that way as in this particular case.

If you truly feel that this is how it was handled, please collect some evidence to support your opinion and you would have a great case to bring to a court. Otherwise please just take rejection like an adult and try a new place.


Because its not possible that in the state of Texas, when I was interviewed by a hispanic lady, that she wouldn't hire a hispanic lady over a white male? Its even more suspicious that the ENTIRE staff in that department was female hispanics.
 

lcpiper

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 16, 2008
Messages
10,611
Then that asshole should get his face out of the gravy trough and start his own damn company and hire whoever the fuck he wants to.

Set the example, not command from the throne.
 

heatlesssun

Extremely [H]
Joined
Nov 5, 2005
Messages
44,154
Finally!! Something you and I can agree on that the Democratic Party has been doing to minorities for years.

And how has the Democratic Party been doing this for years? Passing things like the Civil Rights Act? Attempting to end legal segregation? Nullifying race based marriage laws? I'm not saying that the Democratic Party doesn't have issues but it has a much better record over the last 5 decades regarding the basic stuff than the GOP.
 

raz-0

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 9, 2003
Messages
4,900
Today only 1 percent of venture-capital backed startups are led by an African-American, and only 3 percent of startups are founded by women. Obama said at a press conference from the White House Demo Day that these statistics must change to ensure the US remains a driver of innovation throughout the world.

Translation:

The industry is racist and sexist. So we must force a composition that pleases us because without the right skin color or sexual organs present, the industry will fail.

Which is, in the end the exact same argument being made by people who think if black people, women, etc. aren't there because they aren't and can't be capable, or shouldn't be there because it will ruin the industry. The message from the president is that if the industry is white and asian males, it will lead to a failure of the industry.
 
Top