Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by dalke 3883 days ago
Based on my own cursory observations of the population flux in the Bay Area, I believe your analysis and thus conclusion is based on a false premise.

That analysis assumes that the hiring base is predominately drawn from local people. Speaking anecdotally, I know many people who graduated from college and headed to the Bay Area to look for a job. I myself moved to Mountain View for a job, then later moved away.

A more complete analysis along the lines you took would look at where people in engineering and product management were, say, 1 or 5 years previous. That are would likely better characterize the relevant population statistics.

As an obviously contrived example, suppose people in engineering and product management are only in the Bay Area for 4 years, burn out, and leave, and suppose the companies offer free relocation from anywhere in the US. Then it doesn't make sense to look at the local demographics.

As a more real-world case, consider a place like Los Alamos National Labs, which has a large number of people from around the world working there, with a relatively high turnover rate partially due to interns, post-docs, and visiting professors. Los Alamos county was carved out for the lab, so the demographics of the county reflect the lab, but most of the people working at the lab are not from Los Alamos.

I do not have access to these sorts of numbers, merely pointing out how it's not easy to interpret the numbers you gave, or the certainty of your conclusion that it's a "not unexpected" result. I suspect the uncertainty is actually very high, and a shot-in-the-dark/back-of-the-envelope estimate isn't likely to be useful.

2 comments

I did express the thought of "normalized to an appropiate" metric badly. I don't know what that metric is, and don't presume to know. Local demographics were just one example to me. I'll correct the post.
I quoted your use of "not unexpected" because it suggests that you have some expectation. I would call the the basis for that expectation part of a presumption that you know.
Yeah, i can see how it could be interpreted like that. I didn't have any strong expectation of how it should be. Merely a number of guesses as where that number could end up. To me it seems reasonable that the number would end up somewhere between half of the local percentage and 1.5x of the us percentage (assuming foreigners are not statistically significant), which would put it somewhere between 2.5% and 25%. To me numbers outside of that would be unexpected and surprising.

Interestingly, the 30% number seems to indicate that twitter actually does pretty good user-wise.

Your own statistics reference indicates that 36% of the Bay Area population is foreign born, and 16% do not have US citizenship, so you cannot assume that "foreigners are not statistically significant."
Why not look at the areas where people in engineering and product management came from? It takes very few steps before we start expecting all metrics to resemble global metrics.