Hacker News Reader

Comment by techpeace | Hacker News Reader

Basing hiring decisions on open source contribution rates contributes to the homogeneity (read: white maleness) of the industry at large. Women especially may not have as much time to contribute, since they are likely getting paid 30% less than their male counterparts and are more likely to be single parents than men. Ashe Dryden has a great breakdown of the issue, as well as some suggested alternative hiring techniques: http://www.ashedryden.com/blog/the-ethics-of-unpaid-labor-an...

This isn't a criticism of your comment, just something to keep in mind when making hiring choices. :)

View on HN

> Women especially may not have as much time to contribute, since they are likely getting paid 30% less than their male counterparts and are more likely to be single parents than men.

I don't know if that's it. The undergrad population in the CS department when I was in college was 11% women (already pretty dismal) but when it came to code-heavy advanced courses like writing an operating system it dropped to 0%.

I would guess they either didn't believe they could do it or they were unwilling to put in the extra work, which in a sense was 'unpaid' since it was not a requirement for graduation. None of these women had children or had to worry about pay discrepancies.

Am I correct in assuming that your assertion here is that women don't contribute to Open Source in as high a number as men because they're "unwilling to do the extra work?" This is based on your one experience in college, and its extrapolated gross generalizations. Did you happen to survey 11% of your classmates to determine their specific circumstances? Were there, perhaps, any other offerings of those same classes which you did not attend that might have had female students?

My assertion is that women shied away from this sort of unpaid time-intensive work even when they were not subject to the disadvantages you outlined (childcare and lower income). The real reason, in my opinion, must be something else.

In response to your questions: there was a single offering of the course. All of the women I encouraged to enroll said they were uninterested due to the perceived difficulty and workload. This may or may not have been a cover due to other concerns ("am I good enough?", "I heard only boys take this course", etc.). To be clear, the vast majority of men in CS were also unwilling to enroll in this course because of the workload.

Well, I would have to disagree with your assertion that the women were not subject to any disadvantages, even the ones I mentioned. To know that outright would require something bordering on omnipotence. But feel free to believe that it must have been "some other reason," rather than the myriad entrenched disadvantages that exist in both our society at large and this industry in particular.

Holy shit.

Unwilling to put in the extra work. REALLY??

Hi have we met

> None of these women had children or had to worry about pay discrepancies.

Every woman has to worry about pay discrepancies. In every industry, at every job level. That's what this whole "gender pay gap" is all about, you know?

And it's everybody's job to fix this!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com