[Lawtonfogle]

>In point of fact, an African-American guy and a white guy from the same neighborhood and school will have had different experiences growing up.

The differences between their experiences is smaller than the differences between that black individual (sidenote: I was recently told by a black guy that African American is worse than black when used as an identifier) and someone of the same race who grew up in a significantly different socioeconomic class. If we want to increase diversity, the best would be to do so by class first, gender second, and race third.

[bduerst]

I agree, but socioeconomic class is already highly correlated with race (and sometimes gender), leading to race being used as a possible signal for class.

I think their point was that passive racial biases lead to class differences that can't be summed up in a hypothetical comparison.

[sokoloff]

How would socioeconomic class be highly correlated with gender?

Is there some strange biologic selection mechanism at play?

[bduerst]

Sometimes correlated with gender, such as the gender income gap. I don't know what you mean by biological selection.

[Lawtonfogle]

>Sometimes correlated with gender, such as the gender income gap.

You mean the one that has been shown to not exist?

[bduerst]

> "There are observable differences in the attributes of men and women that account for most of the wage gap. Statistical analysis that includes those variables has produced results that collectively account for between 65.1 and 76.4 percent of a raw gender wage gap of 20.4 percent, and thereby leave an adjusted gender wage gap that is between 4.8 and 7.1 percent."

- U.S. Department of Labor

[Lawtonfogle]

So that is 4.8 to 7.1 percent which can be explained by any of the following:

- Any attributes not accounted for in part or in full. (Of which there are quite a lot.)

- Past sexism which impacts income in the modern day. (Sexism 30 years ago would have impacted starting incomes of people, which would have reflected up til today because one's initial compensation greatly impacts future compensation through many different factors.)

- Modern day sexism.

Given evidence such as looking at just the youngest generation and what they earn, you begin to see women not only equalizing with men in earnings, but out pacing them. This means that 5 to 7% gap is far more likely to be the first and second. And once you compare pay gaps to things like danger of the jobs chosen, you see there are many more factors that are hard to account for because people differ so much in how they view the worthiness of these factors.

Also some things often aren't accounted for. Consider that many studies looking at the pay gap compare full time work to full time work, not differentiating the difference between 37.5 hours a week (full time in government) and 80 hours a week (or even worse at a startup). BUT... even in the studies that do try to compare these, they don't compare the relevant experience gains (the person working 60 hours a week average will gain 1.5 times the experience of someone working 40 hours a week, to say nothing of the potential differences in those who go home and work on related not-work projects).

In short, once you account for all of these and look at those entering the work force, it turns out the pendulum has already swung the other way.

On a side note, there are even reports coming out that this may be impacting the dating market due to social pressures on both men and women to pair up in specific patterns (namely that the man should be making no less than the woman that he is dating and that he should be no less educated than her). While these social pressures are definitely weakening compared to past generations, they are not by any means gone yet.

[hguant]

RE your side note - in the preface to a study on ethnic politics in America, the authors of the study explain why they use the demographic terms they do. Latino, Asian-American, and black. Their data showed that there was a 1.1% difference of preference in Americans of African descent between being identified as black or African American. They also pointed out that black Americans have been discriminated based on their color, rather than their nationality throughout all of American history, and that's unique to blacks, and is the best identifier for that culture group/identity.

The study is in "Can We All Get Along", by McClain and Stewart. Really interesting book that does a good job of making you think.

[Nadya]

How is someone who was more likely to be harassed by LEO's going to have a different outlook on the engineering/programming of an internet-based social media service? Not buying it. Is it more diverse? Sure. Does it matter at all for the task they are performing? I don't see how it does.

>(sidenote: I was recently told by a black guy that African American is worse than black when used as an identifier)

For some - it's putting the `African` before the `American`. For others, it is putting `African` at all (not all blacks identify or hail from Africa). Ultimately, offense is taken and not given. You'll also find people who take offense at being called `black` over `African American`.

Either way - I don't think you need to justify your use of calling them `black`, at least in this context.

[Lawtonfogle]

>How is someone who was more likely to be harassed by LEO's going to have a different outlook on the engineering/programming of an internet-based social media service?

One potential example would be that someone who has unfairly been targeted by the police may have higher privacy concerns and also be more aware of possibilities for the government to abuse information and even violate rights; things that can happen with regards to social media profiles.

For a more concrete example, a gay individual who grew up somewhere where being gay was punished (either codified in law or where the law turns a blind eye to the discrimination) is likely to be far more concerned about systems that can leak sexual orientation, for example an eye tracker/pupil measurer that makes an attempt to determine who a subject finds attractive or not. The average heterosexual may understand that leaking this information could be embarrassing for some, but they may not be as aware it could be life threatening.

Yes, an aware individual not of that background could develop the same concerns after thinking long enough, but they will not have the same immediate concern about any system that interrupts a person's ability to 'pass'.

[Nadya]

I'd like to take the time to thank you for answering in good faith - rather than assuming I had asked in bad faith. So, thank you.

Unfortunately I'm not able, in good faith, to take a stand for or against your argument. Consider this conceding the argument, but not being entirely convinced (allow me to explain).

Initially, I would like to reject it. Because as a libertarian-leaning trans, I fall under both examples you cited. Concern over potential abuse of PII, government overreach, and sexual identity (the concern over gender identity is similar in that regards). But I also fall under the "white, male" label.

However, I do understand the argument that a more targeted individual may be more capable of identifying potential issues. I feel this is contextual and often results in too many "maybes", "potentials", and "possibilities" to be entirely convincing.

"They maybe might have the potential to maybe see a possibility for something that might have the potential to maybe have the possibility of being abused." is not something I find convincing. Though it is technically correct and I have to concede that.

[Lawtonfogle]

The key thing is that I'm on neither side of the debate. I see merits to both sides and look for a way to work out both. Also, I like to work on arguments for any side even if I don't agree with that side (I have sometimes devil advocated for positions just because no one else would touch them).

Personally, at the current time, I see too many problems with quotas for them to be useful. Namely is the perception problem, where people (including the one hired) will think that their race/gender/etc. had more to do with them getting hired than their skill, causing all sorts of problems. At the same time, I do see merit in fighting against known biases and issues that push out minorities.

I dislike both the over PC nature that leads to Donglegate and the bro-culture that leads to common inappropriate comments and behavior.

[Nadya]

So you're essentially where I stand then. :P

I consider myself the "Milo" of transexuals and have a large disconnect with most people who consider themselves part of the "LGBT Movement". Many of which are right up there with PC culture (e.g telling me I can't use the word "tranny", even when referring to myself? Fuck off.)

While I do see the problem and in many places agree - I do not agree with the proposed methods of solving it. That especially includes "quotas" - unofficial or official. Nobody wants to be the "token black guy" (even if there are "40 token black guys") just to improve a diversity number. Which unfortunately is how many tech companies seem to be trying to resolve the "wow that company isn't diverse" criticisms being flung at them.

"If I weren't homosexual, I'd be the largest homophobe." - Milo Yiannopoulos

[incrediblebob]

Please keep in mind, Milo's writing is tongue in cheek. It's generally agreed upon that Milo's writing is parody (ref: https://twitter.com/search?f=tweets&vertical=default&q=twosc... ) . He's parodying Men's rights activists. He is like the Onion but harder to distinguish.

[dcole2929]

A good engineer isn't just sitting at a computer coding algorithms they are actively engaged in helping guide the direction of whatever product they are working on. For something like Twitter, I can see any number of ways in which having a diverse view point could make significant impact on the direction of product. Take for instance the existence of "Black Twitter". That is a very unique use of the platform and community that has arisen over the years. It encompasses everything from #BlackLivesMatter to awards show coverage. It drives a lot of the media coverage of the platform but if you aren't a part of that community, if you don't understand the slang, if you have never engaged in any of the conversations, if you don't know what things those users care about how can you make educated inferences on what features those users need, want and care about.