amrocha

Still not hearing any examples, just ideology!

No, I don’t think that’s true, and I don’t think you could produce a single example.

Keep in mind that stating a fact and dogwhistling are not the same thing.

That’s not my perception at all, but if you find an article like that please change it!

That’s the beauty of wikipedia after all. I recently made my first contribution and it was a really smooth process.

To be clear, I was talking about screening where people work. That part is untenable. And I think large parts of the community would reject it.

I maybe get where you’re coming from, but what’s the solution to the issue you’re proposing? Screening everyone’s resume before allowing them to comment? What about people who work at companies that deal with Palantir at completely different departments (Microsoft and Xbox)? It’s obviously untenable

It is true that some users here spew vile ideology while hiding behind HN intellectual rhetoric. Then posts that understandably react strongly to that get flagged, and users get banned. I wish it was different, but I’ve made peace with that being a significant percent of the user base here.

A particular interaction I had comes to mind. A user here boldly and openly proclaimed he discriminated in interviews against people that look different from him, or that are neurodivergent. Actual illegal behaviour that will get you sued in many countries. I reacted strongly and my post got flagged and I received a comment from the moderation team.

I don’t envy the moderation team though, it’s a tough job.

It’s more likely that you became more radicalized so what used to read as neutral seems partisan now.

You’ve been through all that and yet here you are, successful.

You never had to worry about being the first female manager someone has had. You never had to worry about being judged unfairly because of your accent. You never had to deal with your colleagues saying mildly racist things to your face and expecting you to be ok with it.

And nobody is taking your success away! All I’m saying is that you’re gonna have to wait a bit longer because it’s not your turn anymore.

But apparently that’s not enough, so you’re throwing a fit about it.

And again, your “structural solutions” are platitudes. They don’t work.

No hypocrisy on my end, so it must be you.

You want the injustices to remain unaddressed, and the people affected to wait longer until they are because you never got to benefit from discrimination and now it’s your turn.

I don’t expect you to solve everything, I expect you not to get in the way of the solution.

No you haven’t. You’ve offered platitudes. “I think about it all the time” ok, what are you actually going to do about it?

The grow the pie approaches you mentioned only works while the pie is growing, and we’ve had layoffs for the past 2 years. What is your solution now that the pie isn’t getting bigger?

It sure sounds like your solution is telling people to wait 150 years and hope the problem solves itself.

I can say the same thing at you. If your solution to large demographics experiencing systematic discrimination over decades leading to worse outcomes is to tell them that from now on it’ll be different but that all the disadvantages they experienced will not be dealt with then you’re either insane, or trying to disguise your bias.

The issue is not “discrimination is happening”. The issue is that systematic discrimination has biased outcomes and under represented certain demographics, and that needs to be addressed.

Discrimination against individuals is not a problem.

I don’t even disagree with you about class, but to deal with that we need to deal with capitalism itself, which I’ve given up on at this point.

So if this is the system we’re stuck with, and it’s an unfair system, then let’s at least make sure it’s equitably unfair.

The goal is not to make sure the most qualified person gets the job. I actually think evaluating others fairly is impossible so that’s an impossible goal.

Sorry if you feel that you got the short end of the stick. I got it too. Someone has to.

It’s not a premise, it’s just my opinion.

Sure, elastic handled that poorly, rescinding an offer like that is very unprofessional, but that’s an indictment of their HR department and has nothing to do with the gender of the other candidate.

I understand where you’re coming from, what you’re asking for is a gradual transition to equity. But until that transition is done, you’re also asking the groups that were systematically discriminated against to endure the effects of that discrimination for longer. And those soft approaches you listed take a looooong time to work, and only while the pie is getting larger.

At one of my previous companies they took those soft approaches. The result was that entry level positions were very equitable, but the higher the seniority the higher the percentage of white men. At the rate that the company was hiring and promoting, it would take 150 years to achieve equity at all levels.

To be clear, that means asking women to wait 150 years before they have a fair shot at leadership positions.

But that was all before 2020. After layoffs hit and the growth stopped the equity transition also stopped because the white dudes at the top weren’t willing to step down so women could take their place.

You say being discriminated against is corrosive, but what about the corrosion that already happened because of all the discrimination that happened up until now? Are you going to do something about it? Or are you just gonna tell the people corroded to deal with it?

You have the causality backwards. Your moral stance is abhorrent, therefore I disagree with you and want nothing to do with you. Not the other way around.

Funny enough, to get to actual representative diversity you need to explicitly hire underrepresented candidates and pass up on white dudes. Which Scott famously complained about.

Damned if you do damned if you don’t.

I don’t see what’s wrong about either of these examples.

If diversity is your goal, and you have two equally skilled applicants of different sexes, you should choose the under represented applicant. Elastic made the right choice.

Likewise at Ubisoft, if you don’t explicitly make room for diversity at the top level of the company then you’re never going to get to an equitable state.

The answer applicable to individuals is to leave the suburbs and move to a city.

The answer applicable to the government is to build better cities.

The answer is never stay in the suburbs but take drugs the rest of your life and spend the end of your life miserably unhealthy. You’re free to do that if you want to, you just can’t pretend it’s healthy.

Reality doesn’t care about whether it’s generalizable or not, it only cares about the truth. And the truth is that your suburbs are killing you.

Yes, that’s how you should live if you want to be healthy. If the place where you live doesn’t allow that, then you’re sacrificing your health to live there.

That’s your choice at the end of the day, but don’t make excuses for why you choose to eat garbage all day.

No, it would be pretty easy if it looked like new features were shipping significantly faster. But they’re not.

That doesn’t mean industry output is high, it means people are starting new products.

Has the output of existing companies/products increased substantially?

Have more products proven successful and started companies?

hard to say but maybe a little

Because employers famously hire based on skill and not credentials or existence

There’s nothing “gen z” about Tailwind, and there’s no pendulum effect either, and dismissing the very real benefit thousands of people report from Tailwind based on that is very small minded.

That kind of lack of intellectual curiosity is not a great trait for an engineer.

Contributing to human knowledge doesn’t pay the bills though

You’re right that it’s not much more than a css in js library, but I’ve found myself pleasantly surprised at how efficient I am using it, despite also having years of css experience.

Things like remembering what the flex syntax is, or coming up with a padding system or a colour scheme become very very easy.

I think the editor tooling for tailwind is where most of the benefit comes from.

I also prefer the syntax over direct css in js systems. It’s less characters, which means it’s easier to parse.

Give it a try, you might be surprised!

You’re kinda late to the party. 15 years ago that was the way to build UIs, but componentization changed that. Now we reason about UIs as blocks, not as pages, so collocation of logic, markup, and style makes the most sense.

Not to say that every component should be unique, generic components can be built in an extensible way, and users can extend those components while applying unique styling.

Theming is also a solved issue through contexts.

Reducing coupling was never a good idea. Markup and styling are intrinsically linked, making any change to the markup most likely will require changes to the styling, and vice versa. Instead of pretending we can separate the two, modern UI tools embrace the coupling and make building as efficient as possible.

I reject that framing

You’re the one drawing an equivalency between USA and China where there is none

Ok, and? What does that have to do with the USA invading deposing couping 90% of countries in south america, starting wars in the middle east, and saddling all of africa with debt via the IMF and WB?

Ok, it sounds like you know biased people. Chavez was loved by the people, and Maduro inherited his legacy.