[brooklyn_ashey]

The thing is, I’m actually interested in why we, a community of engineers and tech people, aren’t genuinely interested in evolving the fundamental failures of our system. We might learn something from classical music’s failures which led to its musicians being mostly unable to continue to be professionals. They used this same organization building system we are using now and it led to a collapse of their entire industry. If we “peer review” our code, why don’t we “peer review” the way we build our companies and the way we bring new folks in. We mostly only pretend to care about diversity and we only care about innovation when we are comfortable. It would be great to hear about why we look to the individual interview process for faults it can’t really accept responsibility for. Don’t its fundamental failures lie in the greater system and by extension, the (even unconscious) intentions of the folks who designed it? Ibram Kendi (youngest winner of the National Book Award) recently wrote a book “How to be an Anti-racist”. In it, he details how the SAT was written and how it was specifically and consciously designed to be eugenicist. I’m not claiming that’s the case with interviews, but don’t you think we should consider better ways NOT to redline certain folks out of the hiring process?