Hacker News Reader

Comment by maerF0x0 | Hacker News Reader

Another angle on the issue: If some company is doing something that is suboptimal (such as excluding a viable gender employee group) they will eventually be priced out of the market by competitors (because their inefficiencies will remove their competitiveness).

I wonder how many of these things we should legislate against the "bad guy" vs. just ensure the proliferation/competitiveness of the "Good guys"?

View on HN

No. http://danluu.com/tech-discrimination/

It would be nice if you said what you objected to specifically and describe or specify how the link you've commented adds anything to the discussion.

The idea that companies will be forced by the market to correct discrimination is a nice idea in theory, but false.

I think it's obviously false, but the article will help someone who likes to question the obvious.

The whole "priced out of the market" idea is nonsense. That argument isn't even being made by Andreesen here though. The competitive disadvantage is true, by definition. It doesn't make sense to discriminate from a market perspective. The article only supports this: Greenspan got a competitive advantage by hiring women, because they were cheaper. The free market punishes discrimination. It doesn't end discrimination, but it gives an incentive for hiring women.

If I identified as a woman, I frankly wouldn't be so worried about earning a bit less than my male counterparts, but rather about not being hired at all, because of all the legal risks associated with hiring women because of anti-discrimination laws. Nobody is getting sued for discrimination about firing some white boy.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com