Hacker News Reader

Comment by TinkersW | Hacker News Reader

Your justification for discrimination against white guys is that a very tiny percent of them are legacy admissions and/or from wealthy families?

You know the rest of them are not benefiting from that in the slightest? Actually they are probably hurt by it under the current DIE platforms.

I agree that it would be great if hiring wasn't so focused on a small group of schools(ie excuses to hire people just like yourself).

If DIE is replaced it needs to be with a system based on family income not skin color etc.

View on HN

>Your justification for discrimination against white guys is that a very tiny percent of them are legacy admissions and/or from wealthy families?

"Between 2014 and 2019, Harvard University accepted legacy students at a rate of 33%. This was more than five times the overall acceptance rate of 6% during that period." [0]

In 2022, the overall acceptance rate was 3.2%. The legacy acceptance rate was 42%.

[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legacy_preferences#:~:text=B...

No, I think they meant that removing legacy admissions will result in fewer white guys getting admitted, but that’s ok.

There is a case for legacy admits - continuity of the culture in a university. The culture of a university is what makes it attractive for the next generation of students.

There are proven benefits from increased diversity. My point above is that if we are going to do it purely on merit, let's eliminate all biases and not just the ones in DEI.

Having received degrees from two ivys, and also being part of a legacy that dates back to 1709 at one of those two, i can definitely say that legacy admits dont provide cultural continuity more than the average non legacy student. The cultural transmission gradient is from older to younger students.

That said, i support legacies because these private universities at just that--private institutions, and the first amendment gives you the right to associate with whom you wish.

Your example is interesting. Are you sure your dad didn't impart some culture to you, which you (perhaps unwittingly) brought to the university?

I'm not a legacy admit (my admission was denied, the fools!) but my dad definitely imparted some of MIT's culture on me before I left for college.

The First Amendment says the government can’t arrest you for peacefully assembling. It doesn’t say that taxpayers have to give funding to old money private schools. Maybe if there were financial consequences for discrimination they would take a more skeptical look at the value of this “cultural transmission gradient”.

The first amendment right to assembly is far more nuanced than your proclamation above. A good summary is here:

https://law.justia.com/constitution/us/amendment-01/10-right...

There is generally considered rights held by (among other things) highly selective organizations to not have to follow public accommodation laws (which might harm their selectivity).

I assumed it was the professors/faculty that bring cultural continuity to a school.

Certainly, profs/faculty do being continuity, but I was considering the student experience of the university. (It seemed to me that was what op was asking about with their assumption that said culture was legacy driven)

Professors of course contribute to the student culture too, but by no means as much as the students themselves.

Well if that's "the case," I think I'm comfortable getting rid of it.

Nobody is making you attend a uni with legacy admits.

> discrimination against white guys

Where did I say anything like that? Please quote it - I could have miscommunicated.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com