[ch4s3]

Maybe, maybe not. I suppose that depends on what and how they choose to practice. And there's nothing wrong with giving positive weight to personal projects. I'm just saying you shouldn't penalize people for spending their personal time on things other than coding.

[omonra]

If two people are equally smart, the one who spends more time practicing will be better. Is it not in the primary interest of the company to hire the more qualified candidate?

Do basketball teams sit around worrying that they ought to not penalize players who don't practice free throws on their personal time?

[ch4s3]

You're perhaps misreading me. I stated that the lack of side projects shouldn't be held against people. I think it's fine give positive weight to good, relevant side projects.

I would also argue that a person who is more deliberate about their use of fewer hours will do better than someone who is equally smart but practices less deliberately for more hours[1].

I think that imagining two fully equal candidates only differentiated by their volume of personal projects isn't a particularly useful exercise.

[1]http://projects.ict.usc.edu/itw/gel/EricssonDeliberatePracti...

[omonra]

"I think that imagining two fully equal candidates only differentiated by their volume of personal projects isn't a particularly useful exercise."

But that's precisely the point - two candidates will not be equal if one spends 20 hours a week on personal coding projects and the other does other things (however interesting or beneficial for society at large they may be).

At the end of the day the world is not fair. The question is what outcome you (as a business owner) are looking to advance. If your primary goal is to make the best product - you will have to hire the best people. If your goal is to advance women's careers - you will have to optimize for a different set of objectives.