Hacker News Reader

Comment by ghurlman | Hacker News Reader

And not just women either. It's ridiculous to assume that 100% of the best/qualified programmers would want to work at a place like that.

View on HN

The same can be said of the opposite end of the geek cultural spectrum, though -- the stereotypical Mountain Dew & video games contingent.

I interviewed a startup where one of the co-founders openly mocked me for wearing a tie; when he asked what my interests were (sports and music, amongst other things), I got criticized for not liking "Starcraft and normal programmer stuff."

The issue isn't one specific subset of tech industry culture; it's a result of the startup scene shifting HR roles to technical people who often don't have the soft skills necessary to deal with such tasks effectively.

True indeed; othering is othering, be it over-bro-ing or ignorant defense of "nerd culture".

In fact, I see "bro-ing" to be a defence against "nerd culture". I assert the only reason it has become popular is because of that other end of the spectrum.

it's a result of the startup scene shifting HR roles to technical people who often don't have the soft skills necessary to deal with such tasks effectively.

On the other hand, at least you found out up-front that this particular company probably wouldn't be a good fit for you.

Incidentally, this is how we fix it. If everyone just refuses to work with these assholes, and says so loudly, they'll... well, I'd like to say they'll pack up and leave the valley, but more likely they'll wind up concentrated in their own bro-heavy companies, which still seems like a net win for the rest of us.

Agreed.

Until I see evidence that "bro companies" are more successful than normal ones, I have no qualms about shunning them.

You would be happy with a definition of success that allows for the sidelining of an entire gender?

I think his point was that if we shun them, and they wither and die, then their shunning of a gender ceases to be an issue.

BTW, I'm a she, and yes, that was my point.

My point is that we don't need to crouch this argument in conditionals. I have no qualms shunning ugly behaviors no matter how "successful" they are.

Yes that can be an effective way to change the world for the better, however we should still have state regulation and laws. We should not leave this entirely up to the labour market.

I wouldn't. That's not just white-knighting either. You can't have a culture like that and be seriously committed to making amazing products. That's a culture that chases the outwardly flashy, not the inwardly brilliant.

I only work on products that espouse the latter.

Be realistic, there isn't really any culture that 100% of the best/qualified programmers would want to work in.

But the thing is, a company don't need 100% of the best programmers; in the extreme case of a small startup, you just need a handful of them to get off the ground. If you can make an environment that a few people love, even if most people wouldn't like it, that could be a competitive advantage in hiring. Companies like the ones that the article criticizes may actually be doing themselves a favor, even as they alienate people who find that kind of environment off-putting.

Huh. When I started writing this comment, I did not expect to come to that conclusion.

OKCupid came to exactly the same conclusion in regards to dating; strongly appealing to some people is much better than generally appealing to a lot of people.

(For anyone not familiar with them, they are a dating website that periodically mines their database and discusses observed trends in their blog)

Nor did I want to try and produce some sort of WAG percentage of programmers that would/wouldn't want to.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com