Author Topic: Diversity in American tech companies  (Read 1400 times)

rukawa

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 995
Re: Diversity in American tech companies
« Reply #20 on: February 15, 2020, 08:01:53 PM »
Differences (racial or gender) may explain uneven or disproportionate distributions and that's OK if the result reflects true intrinsic preferences, abilities etc
However, if you look at the graph below which I interpret as a return to the mean (% of women enrollment in dentistry), I doubt that the rise to 50% happened because girls were somehow forced to become dentists. It wonder if a changing culture and fading barriers may have something to do with it.


This all depends on the social desirability of having a generation of women become dentists instead of spending time at home. Most jobs suck and most corporations are filled with back-biting psychopaths. Cleaning peoples smelly mouths for a living (even a great one) doesn't really sound like a more meaningful activity than taking care of family. I'm not sure why we consider it some great achievement that we managed to turn women into men. I would have rather gone in the opposite direction and had men focus less on their careers and spend more time with their families. I mean that is the reason I invest..so I don't have to be beholden to a job I hate, bosses I don't trust and a corporate environment filled with shit.

I don't really get this valorization of work. It seems like a very Anglo-Saxon form of protestant stupidity. To me its obvious that the vast majority of people are not going to find their jobs tremendously fulfilling since for that to happen there would have a fairly big coincidence between the things people desire to work on and the things society as a whole demands people work on based on what people decide to consume. What I mean is that for every thing you decide you want to consume there has to be a person on the other side of that equation who will do the work to make that happen. And for that person to happen to wantto do the work required to enable your consumption requires a huge coincidence between your desires for stuff and the desires of workers to make that happen. And that is hugely unlikely. Thus most people will hate their jobs.

Spreading this misery to women is stupid. Buffett wife left him. I remember her saying: "There is more to life than spending your whole day reading financial statements". She is right. But in a world where work and money are valorized we praise a useless boring hermit like Warren Buffett. I think his wife lived a better and more worthwhile life. I think Starbucks baristas do more for the world in a single day that Warren Buffett ever has or ever will.
« Last Edit: February 15, 2020, 08:06:51 PM by rukawa »


Gregmal

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3200
Re: Diversity in American tech companies
« Reply #21 on: February 15, 2020, 08:43:13 PM »
Rukawa, so true, and admirably well stated.

The societal trends today are all things that undermine morality and family values. Careers and earning dollars has been glorified to an extent that many seem to ignore or even worse not even be able to cognitively capture the inherent values in certain roles previously considered imperative to a healthy lifestyle.

It should not be desired, let alone glorified, to spend ones life at a desk or on a trading floor. It is unequivocally true that the pursuit of money, at best leads one to an unfulfilling lifestyle and at worst, leads to ruin for all those whom make the mistake of surrounding themselves with "career oriented" individuals. Ironically, as Ive stated before a good number of times, the greatest example of this are people whom work in the financial industry. 95% of them are total pieces of shit. Complete cheapskates whom have no clue what life and living are about and instead inproportionately value dollars and savings and "arbitrages", often resulting in taking advantage of people along the way, just to save or make an extra couple bucks. But America has glorified this materialism and now encourages women to join the circus under the guise of "equality". Those that see past this shallow existence should be commended. Those that can't, probably dont know any better.

Yes, look at Buffett, his own biggest failure was that he was a shitty father and shitty husband. Bezos? LOL now walks town with his skank Hollywood arm piece. And this is whats being presented to people as "the model"...

Castanza

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1016
Re: Diversity in American tech companies
« Reply #22 on: February 16, 2020, 06:40:56 AM »
Differences (racial or gender) may explain uneven or disproportionate distributions and that's OK if the result reflects true intrinsic preferences, abilities etc
However, if you look at the graph below which I interpret as a return to the mean (% of women enrollment in dentistry), I doubt that the rise to 50% happened because girls were somehow forced to become dentists. It wonder if a changing culture and fading barriers may have something to do with it.


This all depends on the social desirability of having a generation of women become dentists instead of spending time at home. Most jobs suck and most corporations are filled with back-biting psychopaths. Cleaning peoples smelly mouths for a living (even a great one) doesn't really sound like a more meaningful activity than taking care of family. I'm not sure why we consider it some great achievement that we managed to turn women into men. I would have rather gone in the opposite direction and had men focus less on their careers and spend more time with their families. I mean that is the reason I invest..so I don't have to be beholden to a job I hate, bosses I don't trust and a corporate environment filled with shit.

I don't really get this valorization of work. It seems like a very Anglo-Saxon form of protestant stupidity. To me its obvious that the vast majority of people are not going to find their jobs tremendously fulfilling since for that to happen there would have a fairly big coincidence between the things people desire to work on and the things society as a whole demands people work on based on what people decide to consume. What I mean is that for every thing you decide you want to consume there has to be a person on the other side of that equation who will do the work to make that happen. And for that person to happen to wantto do the work required to enable your consumption requires a huge coincidence between your desires for stuff and the desires of workers to make that happen. And that is hugely unlikely. Thus most people will hate their jobs.

Spreading this misery to women is stupid. Buffett wife left him. I remember her saying: "There is more to life than spending your whole day reading financial statements". She is right. But in a world where work and money are valorized we praise a useless boring hermit like Warren Buffett. I think his wife lived a better and more worthwhile life. I think Starbucks baristas do more for the world in a single day that Warren Buffett ever has or ever will.

I think the sociologist Jordan Peterson has some good insights into current trends. Although I don't agree with everything he said a few of his personal examples were interesting. For example he has a lot of high level corporate clients. He undoubtedly states that his female clients are by far the smarted and most driven. Yet almost all of them burnout by their mid 30's not because they can't hack it. But because a lot of them find no worth in it and want to have a family. I think men in general are less instinctual about having a family (not always the case of course). I've also seen other studies that show men in general gravitate towards certain careers because we are less affectionate and less people oriented. We tend to like working with "things" or numbers over people.

In regards to what rukawa had to say about the family life, I completely agree. It's pretty clear that strong family relations lead to better outcomes, yet society is apparently "progressing" to other family units. Perhaps the of family unit does not matter as long as there is tight cohesion? I'm skeptical of that but I am by no means an expert on the subject.

Paging Cigarbutt :p this sounds like something you would have studied in your past.

Cigarbutt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2143
Re: Diversity in American tech companies
« Reply #23 on: February 16, 2020, 07:04:32 AM »
^
I think the above posts are interesting but perhaps are undermined by a thesis drift.
Initial ę intent Ľ of the thread: work hard and you will get what you ďdeserveĒ (if you happen to think that landing a job in a tech company is the way to go).
Evolution of the thread: you (the individual) donít define social desirability, I do.

If you believe in personal and very individual freedom and the invisible hand of the free market, why decide for somebody else what is good or bad for him or her?

@Gregmal
Maybe Iím mistaken but you come across the various posts as someone who is highly career motivated (Iím not saying it is necessarily a bad thing).

@rukawa
Isnít the capitalist system based on the value of the work that individuals produce? Just to go back to the dentist example (which is useful and relevant to illustrate), most people would consider that dentists produce valuable work and this is one of the reasons that we, individually, put a relatively high price on their services. Itís interesting to note that a womanís earning power working as a dentist may allow the spouse to perhaps contribute to the familyís well-being. Itís interesting also because women dentists have not become male dentists (itís been shown that they tend to conciliate better {value judgement on my part here} work and family priorities).

@Castanza
Iíve been interested in this and similar topics for a long time but most of the above is based on personal reflection. I understand the conservative arguments (my wife made the conscious decision to become a home mother) and have mixed feelings about both parents participating in the work force with the associated consumerist attitude but Iím now surrounded in my household by a majority of young women who somehow want to fully realize their amazing potential (whichever way they want to define that) as human beings.


If you disagree with the target, thatís fine but I would suggest to let individuals trace their own trajectories. There is a risk here that the definition of what a family is may be a more dynamic concept than what the traditional definition implies.

Note:
This is an investment board and I often wonder if these discussions are too prominent but I realize that investment results has allowed a more flexible time allocation to various topics.

Gregmal

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3200
Re: Diversity in American tech companies
« Reply #24 on: February 16, 2020, 10:12:18 AM »
I am highly goal/task oriented. I also love investing as it is one of the great, and criminally underrated paths to freedom. Perhaps similar, but in the context of my life, very different from career oriented. To me, career oriented, is basically a shallow existence predicated upon looking up the food chain seeking acceptance and relying on the judgment of others, with money being your carrot. There is so much more to life.

rukawa

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 995
Re: Diversity in American tech companies
« Reply #25 on: February 29, 2020, 08:52:37 PM »
@rukawa
Isnít the capitalist system based on the value of the work that individuals produce? Just to go back to the dentist example (which is useful and relevant to illustrate), most people would consider that dentists produce valuable work and this is one of the reasons that we, individually, put a relatively high price on their services. Itís interesting to note that a womanís earning power working as a dentist may allow the spouse to perhaps contribute to the familyís well-being. Itís interesting also because women dentists have not become male dentists (itís been shown that they tend to conciliate better {value judgement on my part here} work and family priorities).

Capitalism doesn't truly value anything...it just puts a price on things. Prostitution also has a high price. That doesn't mean we should value it.

I would like to highlight two very contradictory statements of yours that I would call the progressive bait and switch.

Statement 1:
Quote
It wonder if a changing culture and fading barriers may have something to do with it.

Statement 2:
Quote
If you believe in personal and very individual freedom and the invisible hand of the free market, why decide for somebody else what is good or bad for him or her?

Its a frequent progressive tactic. When conservatives question cultural values suddenly everything is about individual choices and how DARE conservatives question the individual choices that women make. Here somehow progressive pretend they don't know a thing about culture or how to influence despite the fact that they have literally dictated cultural changes for the last 60 years. Taneshi Coates does exactly this trick whenever conservatives bring up the fact that maybe maybe just maybe the problems blacks experience might have something to do with the fact that the black illegitimacy rate has sky-rocketed. He always basically states that we can't question this because its all about individual choices black women make about marriage...how dare we question that.

And of course when conservatives defend individual choices of women not to work than progressive switches in the other direction....why would you ever think people choices are freely made...they ask. Everything is socially and culturally determined. There are no free choices. So now we need mandates, quotas, diversity programs and mentors to overcome the societal programming. Suddenly progressives now switch to the idea that culture can be influenced and has to be  influenced in order to free women. Of course the contradiction in progressive ideology here is never noticed which is that if everything is socially determined and there are no free choices that by definition it is completely impossible for women to ever be free...their choices to work or not to are socially determined and not their own. You can't alter a socially determined system to give women more freedom .... its an impossibility.

So basically the progressive idea amounts to women are only making free choices when they do exactly what progressive think they should be doing. And that we should never question the idea of women to work because by doing that we are questioning women's freely made individual choices...how dare we try to control women. But at the same time if women decide not to work we can't assume that they made that choice freely since everything is socially determined.

This is completely ridiculous and contradictory.
« Last Edit: February 29, 2020, 10:33:27 PM by rukawa »

Cigarbutt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2143
Re: Diversity in American tech companies
« Reply #26 on: March 01, 2020, 05:32:53 AM »
...
This is completely ridiculous and contradictory.
Nice counter-attack!
Too bad itís mostly rhetorical. :)

FWIW, I think that if we would independently go through some type of questionnaire about the ďrightĒ to ďleftĒ axis (political compass type of thing), we would end up at the same place on a large number of questions. I may end up less to the right on some questions which may be related to an attempt to bridge to the other side (you decide if this is strength or weakness).

ďCapitalism doesn't truly value anything...it just puts a price on things. Prostitution also has a high price. That doesn't mean we should value it.Ē
Who is we?
Is it an inclusive we?

A nice thing about democracies which integrate the capitalistic engine is that ďsocial desirabilityĒ tends to be defined by a multiplicity of diverse sources that somehow coalesce in a dynamic way. The process can be messy, can run off course and can produce ridiculous results but the end point tends to be progress. How we define the ultimate destination and how to get there are the questions.

To go back to the essence of the opening question, letís say we define that landing a job in tech is socially desirable (we, in the sense that we both agree here), I guess that, individually and as a social group that decided to get together and cooperate, we should strive for an environment where people that deserve it (work hard, talent for it) eventually reach their goals with the least artificial barriers possible, whether you are Black, Latino, woman or whatever. No?

There is a fundamental contradiction (that you correctly pointed out) but the challenge is to be able to unleash human potential and that may involve contradictory objectives. Jay Gatsbyís author once said that the test of {arguing on an online forum} is {sometimes} the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function.

rkbabang

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4616
Re: Diversity in American tech companies
« Reply #27 on: March 03, 2020, 11:14:07 AM »

Capitalism doesn't truly value anything...it just puts a price on things. Prostitution also has a high price. That doesn't mean we should value it.


True about capitalism.  It simply allocates resources efficiently based on supply and demand.  However there is nothing inherent about capitalism that puts a high price on prostitution. Prostitution only has a high price because of government interference in the market pushing it underground.  Black market products and services usually have much higher prices (and lower quality) than they would in an otherwise free market, because the cost/risk of bringing that item to market keeps many who would otherwise participate in that market out of it.  This suppresses the supply and competition from potentially more efficient and/or higher quality providers.