Friday, August 11, 2017

On the Perils of Remaining a Nerd - 3

The nerds have been coming out with "science".  Damore is stating "scientific truths" and is being mini-Galileo-ed, it would seem.

Note that Damore's firing is because how he pissed on people at work, not because of some taboo on "scientific truths".

The fun is that even Damore and his supporters' science and reasoning seems dubious, per an article on Quora. The whole thing is worth a read, but here are some significant quotes.

Do sex differences make women less suited to be software engineers?
I’m simply stating that the distribution of preferences and abilities of men and women differ in part due to biological causes and that these differences may explain why we don’t see equal representation of women in tech and leadership. Many of these differences are small and there’s significant overlap between men and women, so you can’t say anything about an individual given these population level distributions.
At what point did we jump from talking about personalities to abilities? It’s a massive leap to conclude that a slight difference in average personality must undermine women’s professional abilities in software engineering.

Sex differences in cognitive abilities have been well-studied, so it’s intriguing that Damore chooses to ignore this vast literature to focus on personality. The reason, however, quickly becomes clear when we look at the evidence: namely, there’s zero evidence that suggests women should make worse programmers. On average, women score slightly worse on certain spatial reasoning problems and better on verbal tests. Their overall problem-solving abilities are equal. Women used to score worse on math, but inclusive environments negate that difference. Even the (relatively robust) difference in spatial reasoning can vanish when women are asked to picture themselves as male. The only published study of coding competency by sex found that women were more likely than men to have their GitHub contributions accepted — but if they were project outsiders, this was true only if their gender was hidden.

As Yonatan Zunger explained, empathy and collaboration are also central to competency, especially at senior levels. Published results confirm this: in a study that attempted to identify the factors that influence software engineers’ success, the most important attribute was being “team oriented”. Neuroticism might hold women back from promotions, but there’s no evidence it makes them worse at their jobs.

Thus, to say there’s “significant overlap” in male/female abilities is a massive understatement. There’s no evidence that any known sex differences make women worse at software engineering.
 -------


How about preferences? It’s worth remembering that many of the first programmers were women, and that they made enormous contributions to developing the field of computer science. Female participation only declined when programming became a lucrative, gender-stereotyped career.

But suppose women were innately less likely to want to be software engineers. That would, in itself, tend to create a gender-biased environment in which women are unlikely to choose to become software engineers (no matter how innately suited they are individually). In other words, women’s lower average interest would act as an additional filter on both talent and motivation for the pool of available female software engineers. The result, all else being equal, would be that the average female software engineer, who powered through in defiance of gender norms, would be more innately motivated and/or talented than the average male engineer who faced no such barriers.
All in all, we have no reason to think female software engineers should perform worse at software engineering based on female trait distributions. And there’s a huge amount of evidence that promoting diversity improves the performance of teams and companies.
It bears repeating:  "The result, all else being equal, would be that the average female software engineer, who powered through in defiance of gender norms, would be more innately motivated and/or talented than the average male engineer who faced no such barriers."

 

Comments (6)

Loading... Logging you in...
  • Logged in as
Again, where did Damore say women had less ability as software engineers? You are demolishing a strawman of your own manufacture - or more likely, one that you borrowed from somebody else who didn't bother to read the memo.
1 reply · active 395 weeks ago
Let me lead you through it:

a. Damore keeps talking about women in tech and in leadership.

So when Damore talks about "women in tech" he's not talking about something other than software engineering, is he?

b. Damore is saying that the unequal representation of women in tech and leadership is to be expected, in particular why women have less representation.

Quote: http://gizmodo.com/exclusive-heres-the-full-10-pa...

"I’m simply stating that the distribution of preferences and abilities of men and women differ in part due to biological causes and that these differences may explain why we don’t see equal representation of women in tech and leadership. Many of these differences are small and there’s significant overlap between men and women, so you can’t say anything about an individual given these population level distributions. "

So if women are underrepresented in tech (at Google it means software engineering) and it is because of the different distribution of preferences in abilities in men and women, Damore is saying that women have less ability as software engineers.

---
QED.
For future reference: Tristero's satire: http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2017/08/in-thought...
Their is a huge difference between preferences and abilities. It's true that Damore leaves open the question of which (if either, or something else, like discrimination) is responsible for the different distribution of women and men in tech, but that is a perfectly reasonable stance in light of the evidence. It's also true and well-verified that men and women indeed have different distributions of preferences and abilities.

His crime was speaking an unpopular truth - but that's always the ultimate thoughtcrime.
2 replies · active 395 weeks ago
I think it is very clear what Damore is saying. I think Suzanne Sadedin has dissected Damore's memo very nicely. In particular, Sadedin points out that what few studies are there actually show that women are as good if not better software engineers than men; and also whatever dissuades women from following a career in software engineering is likely to have a selection effect such that the women who are there in Google are likely much better and much more determined and interested.

You're like -- some guy claims he has a perpetual machine, and you say "he is NOT claiming he violates the second law of thermodynamics. Where does he say it?"
Also:
It's also true and well-verified that men and women indeed have different distributions of preferences and abilities.....His crime was speaking an unpopular truth.

A "diversity" program, by its very name, acknowledges that people are diverse. It is not an unpopular truth.

A diversity program is necessary, because you and Damore and so on fail to recognize that the most visible traits of this diversity, such as gender and skin color, are irrelevant to the business of a company like Google. If you can provide something competitive with what Suzanne Sadedin wrote on Quora (the main link in the blogpost) , that might be interesting, otherwise there is no point in continuiing.

Post a new comment

Comments by