noko
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /g/ - Technology
You are currently reading a thread in /g/ - Technology
![_85788829_isis2[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/iQxMuha.jpg "_85788829_isis2[1].jpg")
Open source projects are statistically more likely to accept code submissions by women than by men... as long as the women don't identify their gender in their profile. Oh boy.
http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-35559439
>>52950629
>women don't identify their gender in their profile
so that's actually a genderless' person code they're accepting, or am I wrong?
>>52950629
Check the fucking catalog, we don't need 4 of these.
http://slatestarcodex.com/2016/02/12/before-you-get-too-excited-about-that-github-study/
>>52950629
>hurrr durr I make websites so I'm an engineer XDDD
Reminder that calling yourself an engineer in your professional title is illegal unless you've taken the FE or PE licensing exams. Protip:
>they don't have an exam for web developers
>>52950726
>you're wrong because this blog post says so
#pooInTheLoo
>>52950762
>I'm right because this paper says so
>>52950762
>appeal to authority
Problematic.
>>52950629
I look alot like her. Feels bad looking sandniggerish
>>52950824
r u qt girl?
>>52950831
No.I'm a dude. Sorry about that anon.
>>52950841
Aladdin type twinks are okay too, no need to apologize.
>>52950841
nevermind my sand friend
>>52950811
I never suggested the paper was correct, simply that linking a random blog post as a counter-argument is asinine.
>>52950815
It's not appeal to authority in the slightest.
>>52950886
>in the slightest
wrong, there is the implication that a research paper is more credible because it originates from an academic authority
>>52950886
>linking to a counter-argument as a counter-argument is asinine
ok
>>52950728
>>52950728
a delicious way around this is to describe your the schooling u HAVE completed during the interview
"so, I am a recent graduate with an associates of science degree in electrical engineering "
normies immediately think you are smart shit
>>52950909
Where the original claim came from is irrelevant. Even if something is obviously false, countering it with even more bullshit is useless, and there is nothing to suggest a random blog post isn't useless.
>>52950916
A counter-argument is worthless unless it is verifiably true.
>>52950916
not him but generally u have to tactfully site academic sources to be taken seriously in any debate, online or otherwise.
also fuck both of u
women DO statistically get paid less & have to work harder to "prove themselves" in America
>>52950953
(You) could always read the blog post and see for yourself whether it's useless. If the guy who linked it had pasted the argument itself into his post instead, would you still be sperging out?
>>52950954
>women DO statistically get paid less & have to work harder to "prove themselves" in America
and?
>>52951012
>hurr durr I'm a chauvinistic piece of shit, funny because its edgy r-right guys???
>>52951047
women were made to serve men, so i don't care
>>52950954
>women DO statistically get paid less
No they don't
>have to work harder to "prove themselves" in America
They have to work just as hard as anyone
You honestly believe any moron on the street has magically more respect simply because he is male? In technology? In business? Two fields that have dedicated human calculators arguing about numbers?
It's 2016, this meme has to die, and it is all too convenient that all this sexism focus is in jobs that are not labor or physically demanding at all.
>>52951057
pretty sure I've been trolled, if not, enjoy the single life <3
>>52951138
that's my religion, there's no shortage of women who agree with me :^)
>>52951094
>>52951057
a social movement shouldn't have to include you for it to be considered relevant
they said to check your privilege,
because you get to learn about discrimination, instead of having to deal with it on a daily basis for your entire life.
>>52951159
keep going
>>52951152
as an American, I would die for both you and your subjugated wife's rights to practice your idiotic/archaic beliefs.
stay free my friends
>>52951190
thanks m8
>>52950954
BULLSHIT ALERT
Women only get paid less if you pretend a handbag saleswoman should earn as much as an engineer. In fields where women are minorities, they typically work less and get paid more.
reminder that ada lovelace was just a secretary and that ada lovelace is a pornstar name
>>52951217
yes in Silicon Valley & the engineering fields you are correct, although
Only because the shortage of women capable/willing to fill these types of positions.
companies will pay a competitive wage to keep their female workforce from jumping ship as this "saves face" for the company when attempting to seem like they "don't discriminate"
fortune 500 companies get audited regularly
quick question fuckwads,
two candidates apply to work for at&t, one is Pacific islander the other marks down "Caucasian/white" on his job app
both are equally viable as candidates for the position,
who do u think gets the job?
http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/qanda.html
>>52951269
In many professional fields, med is a girls club, psychology and nursing make it almost hostile to men, science and engineering are just the perfect example of how our society panders women. By ignoring problems everyone has and pretending they're female only problems, like achieving gainful employment, they've pretty effectively created (white) woman privilege.
BTW, who the fuck writes their ethnicity in their resume? The most I did was write I volunteered a lot at the local parish, and mostly only so I wouldn't get the "Jewish privilege" handicap.
Oh and it depends where they're applying, government and cucked organisations will choose the Pacific islander. It's a complete misnomer/false dichotomy for everyone else, because only a complete utter racist would hire/not hire someone based on ethnicity.
>Only because the shortage of women capable/willing to fill these types of positions.
This is also a morally bankrupt means of choosing employment, there's a shortage of women because women typically don't enjoy engineering. Neither do most men, but there's quite a few more men who do, typically the kind that played strategy games as a kid, which imo paints the demographic perfectly.
>>52951352
in America, employers literally ALWAYS ask ethnicity & u have to be sure to mark the box that says "NOT Hispanic or Latino" on every application
they wouldn't be asking race/gender identity questions for no reason, if that's not fucked I don't know what is
>>52950629
Who the fuck gives a fuck if you are man or wwoman. That girl is just plain stupid for taking that picture.
>>52951428
Race, ethnicity and culture aren't nearly as much of an issue as gender is. Few people say "more black engineers" than "more female engineers", and that's where the issue comes from. By issue I mean trying to get 4 to 6% of engineers who happen to be women to fill 50% of the jobs, doesn't take an engineer to see a recipe for mass unemployment here.
In the end HR is a horrible mix of left wing extremism and having powers over the unemployed. Whoever thought this was a good idea should be shot.
>>52950954
>>women DO statistically get paid less & have to work harder to "prove themselves" in America
Because women statistically DO LESS PAID JOB. Choos a good profession and you'll get more paid than most men. So shut your lazy stupid feminist cunt.
>>52951352
>make it almost hostile to men
The only thing making it hostile to men are other men. When will macho bullshit die?
>>52951445
so fukken true
>>52950629
who the fuck cares? most code is made by aliens anyway
>>52951476
You mean labelling them "murses"? Male nurses face more hostility and sexism than any other profession, it should be the go to example when you need to prove women are more sexist than men.
I've heard stories that would make any lawyer sign up for pro bono wrongful dismissal. Women are horrible when men are the minorities.
can't spell women without men
>>52951476
Actually no, men in the social sector are treated like shit. Source: I work in the social sector
>@ISISachalee
Heh, while you fags were focused on women's coding standards in the arena, I stopped a major threat by reporting that ISIS terrorist scumbitch to the FBI.
>>52951445
>That girl is just plain stupid for taking that picture.
Because apparently men don't think women can be engineers and look normal.
>>52950629
snackbar
>>52951469
wrong again genius
the pay rate comparison is per field, not apples to oranges.
not comparing engineering salaries to perfume peddlers
http://www.aauw.org/research/the-simple-truth-about-the-gender-pay-gap/
>>52951529
i reckon the guy's implication was that it's a single occurrence, not a rule
>a pretty gurl (with glasses ofc) is an engineer
>that means all gurl engineers are pretty just like the one in the ad
>any gurl becoming an engineer will magically turn pretty just like the one in the ad
why would you bring gender as an argument into software engineering anyway?
>>52951602
u do realize that is what (arguably) this entire thread is about, right?
>>52951611
not really interested in the thread
just saw a picture of a pretty girl
>>52951552
doesn't take into consideration maternity leave or sick days or vacation days
The BBC is pure, unadulterated cancer.
>>52951529
>men
Jusus fucking christ. Yes WE ALL, all of us, the evil men, all over the world, are genetically coded to think that, right. We all know that ONLY ugly women are able finish the university and be a enginieer. Right. But they don't look good on adverts..
>>52951552
>again
What was the first time. Again those statistics that you posted don't show their fields
.
And actually you are wrong. All those statistics you get comparing engineers to parfume peddlers. Your choice of profession is all.
No one will pay more a lazy guy doing the same work, but worse, then a woman who's doing a great job giving 100%. And also people are more likely to chose a woman for job, because , you know, you are alll sooo sweet.
>>52951602
Underrated post!
Gender doesn't exist anyway.
>>52950629
How would the researchers be able to identify genderless submissions into a gender, but the approver not?
>>52950629
> Not peer-reviewed.
D R O P P E D
>>52952623
Easy. They take the best codergrills, make new profiles with no gender. There you go. "Unbiased" research, ho!
>>52951529
I have literally never seen a good looking female programmer IRL. Why am I supposed to NOT be skeptical when a qt girl is being presented as a dev?
Maybe it were male programmers with an anonymous female profile.
>>52952833
i saw one, she's qt as fuck. also yan zhu exists aswell so there are at least 2.
>ISIS
>>52950726
Bretty gud post. I was expecting /pol/-tier drivel about muh SJWs, but all it does is point out that shitty journalists jumped to conclusions after reading a non-reviewed paper by undergrad students. The study itself is quite interesting, although some of the analysis is flawed.
>>52950728
>Reminder that calling yourself an engineer in your professional title is illegal
Not in the US
>>52950784
>camelCasing
>>52950629
You know what miss, although you are provoking /g/'s neckbeards, I think is ok you make this statement, they've been pushy around here themselves.
Just remember we are not all microdick virgins, but they get angry far too easy and appear to be the majority.
Also, reminder that many women lurk 4chan.
>>52950629
She could help me with my enterprise hardware
if you know what I mean
>>52950762
The paper is interesting but it's exxagerated as you'd expect by the beeb
>>52950762
The paper isn't peer reviewed. It's literally a blog post itself.
>>52950629
>noko
Ahhh, the memories
