Comment by anigbrowl | Hacker News Reader

Comment by anigbrowl | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

We already have. At one time pro sports were segregated or whites-only. MLB was effectively segregated until 1947, the NBA was integrated in 1950; football was never formally segregated as far as I am aware. Some argue that hockey is still effectively segregated, though you could equally argue that ice skating is simply more prominent in certain Euro-American demographics.

I presume you're referring to the prevalence of black athletes in some sports, particularly basketball where thy are way over-represented. But that is in fact the result of meritocracy. This is so dreadful to some people that last year there was an attempt to form a whites-only basketball league, although the chances of this going anywhere are negligible.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baseball_color_line

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Fives

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_players_in_American_profe...

http://africanamericanhistorysp2014.voices.wooster.edu/racis...

http://www.thenation.com/article/all-white-basketball-league...

I don't have a firm opinion about diversity in tech companies, but your comment suggests you're unaware of the historical context.

> I presume you're referring to the prevalence of black athletes in some sports, particularly basketball where thy are way over-represented. But that is in fact the result of meritocracy.

Its largely a result the economic disadvantage of blacks in the broader society. Without strong educational opportunities and other economic opportunities, the expected opportunity cost of a focussing efforts on chasing a professional sports career from a young age is a lot lower, on average, for blacks than whites compared to the other alternatives available to them

the expected opportunity cost of a focussing efforts on chasing a professional sports career from a young age is a lot lower, on average, for blacks than white

From a slightly different angle: playing basketball at a very high level is like playing a musical instrument at a very high level - you need to start when you are very little, and you need to play with great devotion. In your average suburban paradise you can't even hope to play sufficient b-ball even to untie Lebron's shoes.

That's a good explanation of why so many young black men pursue sports as a career. But I'm saying that their success within the NBA is the result of skill and ability.

So why do you believe that achievements of Blacks in basketball is a result of their higher ability, but not the same for Whites in tech?

For starters, "Whites in tech" generally start out with the advantage of being white. In America, at least, that's an incredible advantage, even in today's "enlightened" age. It's like getting a head start in a foot race.

Secondly, the tech industry is filled with just as much of a "network effect" as any other industry. That is, like any other industry, who one knows is at least as important as what one knows, and is often far and away the most important thing.

For all its anti-intellectual accoutrement, sport is generally far more merit based than other industries, even if it's not perfect. That's because results tend to be black-and-white (har) and easily measured in a way that doesn't exist in our industry.

I would say that its quite likely that both are a result of higher ability at the time that they are hired, and that, in both cases, those ability differences are also a result of economic injustice that disfavors blacks in society, as discussed in my other post in this subthread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8100861

So what you are suggesting is that this economic injustice causes downstream divergence in ability. Then the solution certainly cannot be affirmative action in hiring, since by that point the ratio of unskilled minority workers is not inherently discriminatory, it's a reality created by discrimination that led to a lack of skill development. I would tend to agree and would argue that the way to address this problem is to increase access to skill development, not hire un or under qualified people.

I'm not making any copmment about white people in technology. Did nobody read the last sentence in the comment above before getting bent out of shape and downvoting it? I have no opinion on that. I was responding to the specific claim in the grandparent post about bringing diversity to areas like sports.

[But that is in fact the result of meritocracy]

And Tech hiring is not based on meritocracy?

You'd think there are network effects at play. Case in point: the makeup of your favourite state school's CS department. The student body is 70 % South Asian, 20 % East Asian, 10 % white, with at least 30 % women. The support staff (that's computer support, not secretarial or facilities) is 100 % white, and 0 % women. Make of that what you think.

I wasn't making any comment on tech hiring. I specifically disclaimed having an opinion on how that interacted with diversity at the end of the post, and and the whole comment was responsive to the question posed in the grandparent post.

> But that is in fact the result of meritocracy.

Unlike employment at tech companies?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com