Lies, Damn Lies, and Tech Diversity Statistics 335
theodp writes Some of the world's leading Data Scientists are on the payrolls of Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Yahoo, and Apple. So, it'd be interesting to get their take on the infographics the tech giants have passed off as diversity data disclosures. Microsoft, for example, reported its workforce is 29% female, which isn't great, but if one takes the trouble to run the numbers on a linked EEO-1 filing snippet (PDF), some things look even worse. For example, only 23.35% of its reported white U.S. employee workforce is female (Microsoft, like Google, footnotes that "Gender data are global, ethnicity data are US only"). And while Google and Facebook blame their companies' lack of diversity on the demographics of U.S. computer science grads, CS grad and nationality breakouts were not provided as part of their diversity disclosures. Also, the EEOC notes that EEO-1 numbers reflect "any individual on the payroll of an employer who is an employee for purposes of the employers withholding of Social Security taxes," further muddying the disclosures of companies relying on imported talent, like H-1B visa dependent Facebook. So, were the diversity disclosure mea culpas less about providing meaningful data for analysis, and more about deflecting criticism and convincing lawmakers there's a need for education and immigration legislation (aka Microsoft's National Talent Strategy) that's in tech's interest?
objective reassessment ... (Score:5, Insightful)
... becomes subjective bias-reinforcement when using the phrase "even worse" in comparing numbers
Re: (Score:2)
It's not "fudging", it's just releasing the numbers the companies have available. They're not compiling ethnicity statistics based on "employees who were US nationals when they went to US-based universities", because no one's asking for that. And they certainly aren't doing the same for all foreign nationals and foreign university systems.
What do you expect to find? (Score:3)
The disclosures showed what everyone knew already - there's a lot of white males around, a disproportionately high number of Asian males, not so many Hispanics and blacks and relatively few women. Do you really think picking at the details is going to make things look significantly different?
And why bring up H-1Bs when talking about only counting employees who have Social Security taxes withheld? H-1Bs ARE subject to withholding for Social Security.
Re: (Score:2)
Right, so if H-1B workers are included in the EEO-1 reports, comparing U.S. college populations to Facebook's 15%+ H-1B workforce, as FB's Sheryl Sandberg did, is kind of apples-to-oranges, no?
Re: (Score:3)
I haven't looked at the report, but from my personal experience, there are some interesting observations that seem to support the notion that gender imbalance in IT is entirely, or at least mostly cultural, and all that talk about "natural differences" is just BS.
Here's why. While there are few enough female coders around, I do notice a definitive trend that the majority of them tend to be immigrants. Generally speaking, China is best represented, there's a good share of Indians and Eastern Europeans, and e
SjwDot.org (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:SjwDot.org (Score:5, Insightful)
The SJW posts will continue until the commenters acquiesce. Not holding my breath. It's not like we don't recognize the SJWs as being the same damn male-nerd-bashers we've dealt with our entire life, only now claiming the moral high ground of "diversity" too.
Re: (Score:2)
That, and timmah got his plums emptied by Anita Sarkeesian.
You go timmah, winning!
Re: (Score:2)
You gotta admit, it's pretty funny when an unknown feminist can just freak the fuck out of these self-described alpha males. I mean, if not for GamerGate setting its own hair on fire, nobody would know who Anita Sarkeesian even was.
Instead, she's turned into a rock star, gets a book deal, and Intel gives half a billion dollars to encourage diversity.
And people wonder why the tech sector is so keen to replace white men.
Re: (Score:2)
But it is your fault she became famous.
Gamergator responds to charges by proving them. Way to go, cuck.
Re: (Score:2)
But it is your fault she became famous.
I don't run any publications chucklehead.
At least not yet.
Gamergator responds to charges by proving them. Way to go, cuck.
Yeah, those damn patriarchal facts. So you're pressing on towards seniority then? Maybe you'd be better served looking for women in a tropical clime rather than aping a misandrist, I believe they don't really care what you look like as long as you sign over the pension.
Re: (Score:2)
And for the record I'd advise local law enforcement to put up signs telling kids they should not feel welcome on your lawn. Ugh, Lena Dunham anyone? 500 yards or more champ.
Re: (Score:2)
And yet, it's your clubhouse that has put out the welcome mat for pedos.
http://www.dailydot.com/politi... [dailydot.com]
Re: (Score:2)
A lie which, like all others before it, was completely disproven. Disproven by the fact the GameJournoPros supporter who distributed alleged "child porn" wasn't arrested and the investigations determined there was no child porn.
Kinda funny it took this long to go back to the age old "think of teh children!!!111eleventyone" argument though.
Re: (Score:2)
So I guess that means there's no child porn on infinite chan right. In other words, he made it all up in order to slander gamergate and infinite chan. Well that sure make it easy doesn't it? It's always nice when people come right out into the clear like that, and simply prove what everyone already knows. That when someone doesn't have something substantive, their only recourse is slander and libel.
Re: (Score:2)
Pretty much exactly that, in fact what he claimed to be childporn was in part just gay pornography... a common libel made against gay men. If there were child porn on fullchan then the anti-gamergate person who downloaded and public distributed it would have been arrested for distributing child pornography. He was cleared by the police, therefore there was no child pornography.
This was right up there with the GNAA paying people $20 to tweet misogynist slurs and threats... and Zoe Quinn retweeting their offe
Re: (Score:2)
Yep. Here's one if you haven't seen it yet, the sql database for "lizard stresser" is in the wild now, and there's apparently some very interesting email addresses in there. Including information on the person who paid $500 to DDoS 2ch and 8ch.
Re: (Score:2)
I wouldn't be surprised if Literally Who, Wu, Blue, and Chu and some other big names were on there. Hell I'd be surprised if at least one WASN'T.
Re: (Score:2)
Really, I'm leaning the same way but if they did...my question is how stupid do you have to be do to it. As well hotwheels has something up as well [8ch.net], telling mootles to talk to him about something a mod or couple of mods sent him. A lot of stuff flying around the biggest theory is that the ddos against infinite chan was done by a group of mods with his consent. Whether or not that holds true, we'll find out in the next day and a half.
Re:SjwDot.org (Score:5, Interesting)
More seriously though this nonsense is getting crazy. Story after story about gender diversity, why women are being driven out of tech by rapey neckbeards, a resolute refusal to take a long hard journalistically honest look at gamergate (when gamergate should have been the FOCUS of a site like slashdot), it reeks of complicity with the insidious agenda of the demented hate movement known as feminism.
I'll tell you this "editors", the time for such manipulations is almost at an end.
Re:SjwDot.org (Score:5, Insightful)
Of the 7.6 million STEM workers [ieee.org], only 24% are women [commerce.gov].
Of the 3.7 million public schoolteachers, only 24% are men [ed.gov].
I'll start taking all this gender equality stuff being reported seriously when I see at least half as many articles complaining about the latter as I see about the former. If one is a "problem", so is the other. Otherwise I'll take it there's an implicit assumption that women like to teach (or are better teachers) than men. And likewise men like STEM (or are better at STEM) than women.
Re: (Score:2)
Funny enough, there is a concern. MenTeach is about children's success. We want a diverse workforce, both men and women teac [menteach.org]
Re: (Score:2)
but there's an inherent distrust that a male teacher will rape all the female students that basically scare off the male teachers.
Nothing inherent about it, it's a deliberately fostered and carefully cultivated narrative, which like all of these schemes ends up with people unfit for the job being given the job, leading to an epidemic of female teachers raping male and female students [wnd.com]. And that list is by no means comprehensive, Fark used to run a daily piece on the latest female teacher/male student paedophile case. At this point it would be a considerable endeavour to gather and organise the ever increasing mountain of cases.
Re: (Score:2)
Umm, no.
If 25% of the PEOPLE who are interested in STEM are women, than 25% women in STEM is perfect representation.
Your analysis reduces to "there are 150 million women in the country. If 37 million of them are interested in STEM, then there is perfect representation. Never mind that there aren't 150 million STEM jobs for those 37 million women to take 25
Re: (Score:2)
Ah the old "everything has to be fixed at once or there's no point fixing anything at all argument".
Total crap.
Re: (Score:3)
The lack of men in education is a big issue, but possibly not one that will get a lot of coverage on a tech news web site...
Re: (Score:2)
Oh gosh, tinpot shaming tactics wedded to bullshit, where do I sign up?
Re: (Score:3)
This is why it keeps coming up - people here are unwilling to face the simple truths that the rest of the world did long ago
What, truths like "women have always, always worked outside the home even after marriage despite the hysterical narrative being pushed by people such as yourself that they were chained barefoot to the kitchen sink until the psychotics of second wave feminism saved them"? Truths like the fact that white goods did far far more to change the roles of women in society than feminism ever did as they freed up huge amounts of time? Those simple truths? Or maybe you'll take Einstein's word for it:
"Above all things
Re: (Score:2)
Ugh, people like you make me sick.
People who refuse to believe the lies, mysoginy and general shit spouted by gaters make you sick? Well, count me in. If that makes you sick, I want to make you sick too.
Re: SjwDot.org (Score:5, Insightful)
euphemism
No it's a euphemism for a group of people who whine, bitch and moan because they think they're special snowflakes and would rather the world work on their idea of justice, or promotion. Instead of merit, and law. Note that the UVA scandal is an example of SJW's in action, so was the whining and moaning over Mozilla's president being fired for making donations on his own time to a group.
You can try and label it as the "scary conservative bogyman" but you're only proving one thing. That you actually have no substantial argument that people are right in calling them the bottom feeders of society.
Re: (Score:2)
... or that people are actually individuals and their genders are not their direct identities.
Sure, I am male but that only matters in one situation (due to my handicap of being straight) and we aren't doing that right now so I have no interest in your gender.
If you can help me work through the design of this idea without resorting to arguments relating to "where the braces will go", then I think this may be the beginning of a beautiful colleagueship.
it all works out (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
29% of the workforce by weight is female.
But how many football fields?
I don't think it'll ever really happen (Score:4, Insightful)
When one looks at scandals like "gamergate" and other situations where women are finding themselves subject to personal attack when they disagree with other members of the community, you can begin to see the underbelly of the problem. Boys that don't get along with girls, objectify girls because of their own needs, and never are taught to behave otherwise will automatically reinforce an environment that's struggled with gender parity from the beginning.
The solution is to fix this when boys are in their tween and teen years, but that takes effort and a willingness to deal with the social issues that led to the problem in the first place. Screeching about the problem after it's become established won't fix it.
Re:I don't think it'll ever really happen (Score:5, Insightful)
What's that about gamergate and women you say? Sorry I couldn't hear you over the sound of the actual women [youtube.com] that people like you are busy calling racial slurs [twimg.com] while trying to pin the blame on nerdy men.
Also women actually IN the tech industry call bullshit [linuxjournal.com] on you too.
Re: (Score:2)
And just to prove the point, GamerGate swatted three of those SJWs in the past 2 weeks. Because it was the ethical thing to do.
Re: (Score:2)
Except there's hard proof it wasn't gamergate that did that, and if you want to play that game you're still playing catchup to the fact GameJournoPros supporters have swatted more people AND gotten more women and non-whites fired or blacklisted AND doxed a full order of magnitude more people...
Re: (Score:2)
I'm glad you asked:
http://www.theguardian.com/tec... [theguardian.com]
Re: (Score:2)
I'm glad you asked:
http://www.theguardian.com/tec... [theguardian.com]
I've read that article and it does not support this statement that you made:
And just to prove the point, GamerGate swatted three of those SJWs in the past 2 weeks.
You want to try again?
Re: (Score:3)
Your own citation disproves your claim by pointing out the board behind this has absolutely no connection to gamergate.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
And it made you so sad that you and your anon buds felt you just had to put a stop to it, right?
So much for ethics in journalism, you entitled overgrown child.
I'm not anon, and I did no such thing. I do, however, tend to ignore the distress calls of the most privileged and well-off demographic in the world - trust-fund crybabies.
Re: (Score:2)
Gawker lost 7 figures in ad revenue in a couple months after the "bring back bullying" comment. You'd think /. could take the hint about which side of these issues has the money. This site has been in "controlled flight into terrain" since Taco left. Now we know why - I never had such respect for him as I do now, seeing what he chose to avoid.
This brings up another question ... (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I've not seen +5 Troll in years since they changed how the rating is computed.
Comment removed (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
It's about equality of opportunity. The feminist stance has always been the same: if a group (male, female, white, black, asian, oriental, straight, gay, transgender, basically anything the person has no control over) is disadvantaged it's an issue that needs addressing.
Never had anything to do with a 50/50 mix or any nonsense like that, it's simply about opportunity and people being able to do the things they want to do without undue barriers.
Gender studies and diversity is complete bullshit. (Score:2)
Brainwash 1:7 - The Gender Equality Paradox [vimeo.com]
Force women at gun point to join tech (Score:5, Insightful)
... or they'll choose to do something else. There is no institutional sexism. No one has been able to find it.
All you have is a stat that shows women don't statistically pursue this career. There is no evidence that universities are discriminating and there is no evidence that companies are discriminating.
So what you are really upset about is women CHOOSING to not go into tech.
You apparently don't like people having choices. You want everyone to statistically fall into perfect little patterns and do things according to your numbers.
Only one way to do that. Force women to and men and any other arbitrary group your stupid statistics think are relevant... and force them into tech... or else... scorpions? I'll leave that up to you.
Absent that, people are not going to fall into these statistical patterns. More men are going to get into some careers. More women are going to get into others. How many male kindergarten teachers are there? How many men work at maternity wards in hospitals? Women like small children and babies. They just do. And so that is ONE example of a career women tend to be happier in then men. I am not saying they should be pushed into it or that they should do it. They personally choose to do it because they like it. It is a choice.
And men often like solitary complex tasks working long hours often for no more reason then because it is hard and if they don't do it no one will.
Men like jobs that no one else will do. We gravitate to that stuff. We like being the guy that signs up for a couple years in the Merchant Marines seeing land no more then a couple days out of a month for years. Our contacts with civilization basically being a bar crawl climaxing with a trip to a brothel. Deal with it.
Men and women are not the same. They're not. We like different things. Pretending it is all socialization and otherwise women would love action movies and guys would be crying on the couch eating ice cream while watching romantic comedies is the opinion MORONS have.
I am not a moron. However, there are clearly a lot of morons running around and quite a few people don't seem to be able to tell the difference between morons and normal people. Because the morons are being treated like they're smart.
I think part of it might be that what the morons are saying doesn't make any sense. And we tend to associate things that do not make sense these days with something so smart that it is just beyond us. Except, sometimes things that don't make sense actually don't make sense... because they're stupid.
This whole feminist kick that the media is going on these days is dumb. You are embarrassing yourselves and you're not helping women.
If you actually won, the best you'd have accomplished is cause the competency of women for a generation to be questioned because no one would know if they earned their job or if they were some sort of diversity hire.
Stop being stupid. No really. Stop eating the lead paint chips which I am assuming is a popular ingredient at jamba juice.. and just stop. It is your job to write articles and talk. I don't want you to starve.
Just try harder to not literally have the opinions of literal idiots. Not saying you are idiots... just that you happen to be thinking in much the same way and it is not acceptable.
Re: (Score:2)
There is no institutional sexism. No one has been able to find it.
The thing is -- I read your post, and I think "that's institutional sexism right here".
I agree with most of what you wrote. But other bits are a sort of weird distorted view of the tech industry, or a picture of an undesirable workplace that should be changed. For instance, "men often like solitary complex tasks working long hours" -- (1) as a married man with a child, I'm delighted that I don't have to work long hours; (2) the successful senior folks are those whose work is accomplished through meetings li
Re: (Score:2)
You literally just claimed the lack of evidence of something existing is ipso facto proof of it existing. That's a textbook example of a complete failure of logical validity.
Re: (Score:2)
No he didn't. He claimed that his statements were examples of existing institutional sexism.
Re: (Score:2)
while specifically quoting the statement that there is a lack of evidence of it existing.
Re: (Score:3)
First, there is no evidence you can point to in my post of sexual discrimination. Simply claiming you FEEL that there is can at best be put down to you not liking my conclusion but lacking any rational objection. I can neither respect nor credit your position as valid on this issue absent evidence.
Second, as to your personal feelings about working long hours you must realize we're talking about statistics that average literally millions of people together. Your personal opinions are not even a drop in the b
Re: (Score:2)
There is no institutional sexism. No one has been able to find it.
Yes they have. You must not have been listening, it's been well documented.
Example 1. Manager has a post to fill. Puts out a message on networks like LinkedIn and other watering holes for people in the industry. Problem is that because most of his contacts are male most of the applicants will be male too. He could make an active effort to expand his contacts, or ask people with more female contacts to pass details of the job along. In the end he still picks the best candidate, but this way he has a bigger p
Re: (Score:2)
Your example is not sexism. There being a lot more men and tending to thus hire men does not mean anyone is against women.
You have fundamentally misunderstood what sexism means. One would need to be intentionally biased towards women to be sexist. Without direct intent you've got nothing.
As to example 2, that is no more sexism against women then it was sexism against men when I joined a design course and I was the only male in the course. All women but me. It was also taught by a woman. Were they discrimina
Re: (Score:2)
You have fundamentally misunderstood what sexism means. One would need to be intentionally biased towards women to be sexist. Without direct intent you've got nothing.
Now you'rejust making shit up. Unconsious bias which causes people to discriminate against women is also sexism. Just because you don't want to admit sexism exists doesn't mean you get to alter the definiton in order to maintain your world view.
Well, you can pull a Humpty Dumpty and go around using your own private meaning but if you try to co
Re: (Score:2)
There is no institutional sexism. No one has been able to find it.
Yes they have. There's a nice article in PNAS about a technical job in biosciences. They randomly assigned a gendered name to CVs. CVs with female names got fewer job offers and a lower salary offer than male ones.
http://www.pnas.org/content/10... [pnas.org]
TL;DR: people were biased against applicants they believed to be female. That is pretty much the dictionary definition of sexism. And that paper is pretty much out right proof of sexism at an insti
Re: (Score:2)
Rationalizations are not required.The study applied to a single organization and a university apparently at that. With such a tiny sample size it is impossible to conclude anything.
What is more, I'll note just for giggles your study showed that female managers were as likely to rate female applicants as being less competent given equal information.
I will conclude with the observation that increasing affirmative action policies will further damage the impression that women are not credible because you will c
Re: (Score:2)
I know... I just don't proofread my internet posts... sorry grammar nazis.
Re: (Score:3)
As to the paper, I addressed that previously. That was on ONE university. That is not a large enough sample to base a systemic conclusion on.
As to your anecdotal examples, I can answer yours with mine. That accomplishes nothing.
As to purging the evil males, there is no just way to do that so you're likely to do it arbitrarily which by definition will punish innocent people while also failing to get bad people. So it is pointless.
As to your kindergarten point, all you're doing is admitting to systemic anti m
Why is diversity an objective? (Score:5, Insightful)
How does being diverse help a company or team?
Why stop at Microsoft?
Let's look at the NBA Portland Trail Blazers. No women, not enough south-Americans, Asians, native-Americans or even whites!
Doesn't the NBA realize they would be so much better off if they focused on diversity instead of their narrow minded goal of getting the best basketball players?
That Paul Allen guy is a performance and results bigot. Just look at what he is doing with the Seattle Seahawks.
I see anti-diversity examples all over Allen's successful investments, with a clear focus on talent, skill, work ethic, etc. instead of a person's race or sex.
What kind of world will this result in, if people are rewarded for what they contribute instead of what they look like and whether or not they have any balls?
stop already (Score:2)
you know what? most stylists are women or gay men. Oh no, I'm being discriminated against! And women plumbers are totally under represented (though the ones who are doing it are freakin rich).
Perhaps its time to consider whether anyone has asked the question: do women really really want to work in IT? Or do they prefer other professions? Accounting? Sales? Something else?
Re: (Score:2)
Five digit slashdot UID.
And one wonders why there is so much interest in making tech less of a white boys club. It's because this is the
Re: (Score:2)
The people who "keep the internet running" have nothing to do with the sad little manbaby dinosaurs that are being pushed out of tech.
How to influence the innumerate with CS Ed stats! (Score:2)
Why we need $400 million to teach K-12 CS [seattletimes.com]: 1. [code.org] "Only 10 percent of schools teach it [CS]." 2. [slashdot.org] "No Girls, Blacks, or Hispanics Take AP Computer Science Exam in Some States." 3. [nsf.gov] "Currently, only 25 states allow computer science to count as a mathematics or science credit towards graduation."
Re:How to influence the innumerate with CS Ed stat (Score:5, Insightful)
The very best engineers, programmers and wizards are not school taught - they are autodidact.
To the point that many have a CS education, that is only pro-forma so they fulfill employment requirements.
Anyone who takes CS to learn CS is already behind. If you actually learned something you didn't already know, you probably didn't have much of an interest or a knack in the first place.
To get more [insert favorite minority] into STEM/CS, the members of [insert favorite minority] have to take an interest in it. Schools can't teach you the drive and curiosity that makes you worth keeping as an employee. They can only teach you what you can pick up in a fraction of the time by reading and playing around.
To expect to be a successful engineer because your parents sent you to UCB is as silly as expecting to be a successful musician because you took music classes. Without an inner drive and interest, it won't do much good.
And the problem is that women in general don't take a personal interest in maths, science, engineering or similar. That has to come first.
Meh, gender diversity sucks in tech (Score:3)
The company I work for (roughly 300 employs, fairly major UK national insurance broker) had to hire a new web dev last year. We put the feelers out in June, ended up interviewing throughout July and August, eventually hiring someone in September.
The job went out to all the usual boards, the HR dept (two women) hunted for candidates on LinkedIn, and we were also passed résumés by several agencies.
We saw well over 100 résumés in that time, with Indian and Chinese candidates massively over represented. How many résumés did we see from women for the position? Not one. Not a single, solitary one.
So yes, gender diversity sucks in tech, but when women aren't applying for the jobs, how can we diversify?
Re: (Score:2)
This is the real issue: women just aren't as likely to want to be programmers as men.
I work at a company where almost all the programmers are male, while QA is probably close to a 50/50 mix or even majority-female. Seeing the (female) QA person on my team write some SQL during the course of her testing and being obviously competent at it, I asked her if she'd ever want to be a programmer instead of QA.
S
Teachers and Nurses? (Score:3)
How come there are never any reports on the fact that elementary and middle school teachers are overwhelmingly female? How come there are never any reports on the fact that nurses such as LPNs and RNs are overwhelmingly female?
What's being done to close these gender gaps? Why is it never reported? Why is it not important? Wouldn't it be good for kids, who spend a lot of their life in school, to also have male teachers as role models?
What about college admissions? Female admissions have been much higher than male admissions for quite a while now. Why isn't this being reported? Shouldn't we be discussing what to do about that?
Forgive me, but I've seen this "gender gap in technology" thing reported over, and over, and over and over and over and over and over and over ad nauseum, the last few years. It's a discussion that's worth having, to be sure, but it astonishes me how gender gaps in other, probably much more important areas, are completely ignored.
Why is that?
Re: (Score:2)
Why is that?
Because technology jobs are better paying.
The "equality" is asymmetric.
Re: (Score:2)
The thing you need to remember is that when feminists talk about the 'gender gap' these days what they MEAN to say is the gap is not large enough.
Women have more choices, more opportunities, better health, longer lives, more social stature, and more support than men.
And THATS NOT ENOUGH!
Once you understand that, things become clearer.
Sad, isnt it.
Re: (Score:2)
Simply put it's because all of this is a dog whistle [linuxjournal.com] for attacking nerdy men. Before they were bullied openly for being nerds, now they're bullied under the justification that they're "misogynerds".
So (Score:5, Insightful)
Is there a way to reclaim Slashdot from this constant barrage of psychological assault on IT professionals by outsiders?
I'm a bit of a nerd and I'm an IT professional. This place used to be a place to find news of interest to nerds and IT professionals. Now it's a place where there's going to be a daily article about how shitty a person I am and how shitty my industry is.
Is this what the rest of you guys come here for? To get shit on daily? It's kinda feeling like Slashdot has just become a bad habit I do when I'm bored because I've done it so many times before.
Is your target audience people who are nerds, or is it people who are envious of nerds? It's kinds feeling like this place has become the latter.
Re: (Score:3)
To quote Dr. Hoff-Sommers: "In early 90s, my side won all the arguments. But the other side quietly assumed all the assistant professorships." Despite an overwhelming majority of even women rejecting the SJW's toxic branding they have disproportionate clout due to actively seeking out media influence.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, it is called "stop being misogynistic whiny manbabies if you're called on some of your misbehaviour".
The other way is of course time. There is a movement for more diversity, and it will win eventually when said manbabies die out. Given their obnoxious whinging, they are not recruiting faster than they are dying out, and every flare-up into uglyness like GamerGhazi throws off more mode
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Companies that don't hire the best employees fail.
False. Just look at the board of directors of many companies - the companies survive based on inertia and cronyism, not merit.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
First, man, check your phrasing. You make a fair point, but the connotation of phrases like "white wimmin" and "smart chicks" isn't going to help you sway anyone you want to sway.
I'm paraphrasing but there was a line I read a short while back in a book called Pinched, I believe by Don Peck that said something like "society has learned to deal with women in the workforce far better than it has learned to deal with men being out of it." Ultimately I think that's true. If we're going to have more gender parity
Re: This is tragic! (Score:2, Informative)
But in C#, an int technically is a struct (or value type).
Re: (Score:3)
I read these meaningless PR releases utterly devoid of any context (proportion of female applicants, proportion of female applicants meeting the skill requirements etc.) and find myself getting rather annoyed as they seem to suggest that employees in these companies, the whole industry, and by inference, I, did not get a job through merit but because of some kind of gender bias.
But then I read posts straight out of Mad Men like this one, purportedly written by someone who would have a say in hiring, and I t
Re: (Score:2)
My theory for why we lack women in science (not sure about engineering) is that science is structured to reward individual prowess. You get a PhD by doing your own work.
I was an assistant director of a lab. The men in the lab all pretty much stayed in their swimming lane. The women were busy socializing with one another. Since we had a lab, they had a place to socialize and myself and the director had no problems with them socializing over their research or anything else. The research produced by the men an
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, if my math and data entry is correct, based on the EEO-1 numbers, women's share of Microsoft's U.S. force (including all ethnicities) is still only about 24%.
Re: (Score:2)
I tried reading it, but when it started going on about non-white left-handed females born under an earth sign who prefer pepsi it made my head spin.
I might have to draw a Venn Diagram.
Re: (Score:3)
Ah, thank you. Remember when I said SJWs were the same mal
Re: (Score:2)
Bad narrative. It's not the nerdiness that makes you obnoxious. And everybody's a nerd now, so it just doesn't matter. Nerds are over. Nerds are dead. You've got ex-jocks using Tor.
See above. Nerds aren't the only game in town for tech any more. And the truth is, you're not as nerdy as you think. Compared to some twenty-something girl with blue hair and piercings who writes perl
Re: (Score:2)
Nerds are over like gamers are over. How'd that work out for you? Oh, right. When the mainstream media made a Nightline segment for your side, it got less than 900 likes and over 22,500 dislikes.
Ex jocks may be able to use Tor. They sure as hell aren't going to build it. Like I said, it's not
Re: (Score:2)
$300million is a pretty broad gesture. With other companies following suit.
You ever hear of a company investing money in hiring more gamers? Hell, even game dev companies don't hire gamers any more ever since Early Access replaced beta testers.
Re: (Score:2)
$300million is a pretty broad gesture. With other companies following suit.
And yet, even with hundreds of millions of dollars worth of persuasion, not to mention all the coddling and discriminatory policies in favour of females, nothing has changed. You want to be in tech in a majority, then be a nerd, because that's who's in tech in large numbers. If girls don't want to be nerds it's because of people like you who think it is okay to pick on nerds. Somewhat ironically, the treatment that nerds get from society as a whole is probably contributing to females not wanting to be a ner
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, they do, and one of them has become one of GamerGate's prime targets. Her name is Randi Harper, and she goes by "FreeBSDgirl". She wrote the GamerGate autoblocker for twitter. All by herself without a big strapping gamerboy to help her. She's got blue hair, piercings, and writes
Re: (Score:2)
Randi Harper is an awful "coder", a child abuser, drug addict, and has constantly doxed and harassed people. You're making everyone else's point for them.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I'm personally through being defensive and have decided that going on the offensive is better. Because as Ratzo has so clearly demonstrated, getting women in tech isn't really the object. The object is to bully the male nerds out.
Re: (Score:2)
Read these two, one by a major female linux hacker and one by a mental health professional: http://www.linuxjournal.com/co... [linuxjournal.com] http://slatestarcodex.com/2015... [slatestarcodex.com]
Re: (Score:2)
It's that there are certain other fields -- e.g. sales, advertising, finance -- which are notorious for being filled with macho men who don't take women seriously and will "hit on anything with a skirt". Based on knowing people from some
Re: (Score:2)
Men in tech are just pitiful. Reading these mewling, whining comments, one does not need to wonder why big tech companies are trying to encourage diversity.
Leave us level-headed folk out of your self-loathing.
The funniest part is that male Slashdot readers actually think their opinions matter on the topic of diversity. So, just for the record, nobody cares what you think.
Reality says something different. For all the money and effort being poured into changing the diversity numbers, for all the media coverage and sexist -exclusionary BS, they haven't changed a single damn thing. You are free to say that the layman/laywomans opinion on this doesn't matter, but reality would say that you are wrong. The common person isn't being fooled yet.
The industry is trying to recruit women because you are so awful to be around, and you are not half as irreplaceable as you think.
It's no wonder shit's so messed up. Look who's been in charge. Big white manbabies.
Like I said, your self-loathing - your problem. You appear to be annoyed that other men don't share your self-loathing. I'm sorry - not everyone buys into faith-based reasoning. Maybe if the diversity people have some sort of, you know, evidence of something other than non-diversity? Evidence of skewness is not evidence of discrimination.
Oh, and by the way, I'm not white you ignorant rascist fuck.
Re: (Score:2)
>Claims to fight against gender based shaming and slurs
>Uses tons of insults based entirely around the very things poster is claiming to fight
Re: (Score:2)
Sure. Huge multinational corporations definitely cater to "societal pressures". They're not all about profit. They're all about catering to the SJWs.
Top kek, right there.
Re: (Score:2)
And the reason they're doing that is staring at you in the mirror.
Re: (Score:2)
Techraptr, gamesnosh, most of the ones that have sprung up as a result of the jezebel plague taking over the previous websites.