> They also came up with other great ideas, including adding a tool that automates the first coding task and removes a candidate’s identifying information. Based on the feedback, we’ve implemented a number of changes to our internal process for recruiting.
At no point do they say they implemented removing candidate information. They say it was suggested, and then _separately_ they state they implemented a number of changes.
You can't randomly pick 50:50 out of 18:82 and they very much didn't.
> 3) politics are disincentivizing efforts to broaden the talent pool via obvious means -- such as by reintroducing and motivating women to participate.
You're literally replying to a company's public post that they discriminated in favor of women. Yet you think our general politics are disincentivizing to women?
> Sounds like they've at least thought about that and made the first stage blind.
Then your reading comprehension needs work since at no point did Duolingo say they made the first stage blind. What they said was:
> They also came up with other great ideas, including adding a tool that automates the first coding task and removes a candidate’s identifying information. Based on the feedback, we’ve implemented a number of changes to our internal process for recruiting.
That this 'great idea' to remove identifying information was come up with, and that they 'implemented a number of changes' are two separate statements.
The post already told you, when they tried to hire just based on merit they got all men. There's nothing blind about their 'corrective' path.
> The correlation is strong, although causation is debatable.
I'm sorry, are you trying to say market wages are set in some grand conspiracy?
Software pays well because software companies tend to be very profitable. Since the engineers that make said software are a limited resource, they gain leverage against the profit they are needed to create, and wages rise.
Teachers are paid out of public funds, there is no profit pool to share.
> It's no surprise that the efforts to achieve gender balance in a highly-paid industry gets a lot more attention than any gender-imbalance in a lowly-paid industry.
It is surprising to me. Public school teachers will always be paid less than programmers, this is the constant of public/private. Saying that fact justifies not examining the mirror ratio in the teaching industry is insane.
There are about 3x as many grade school teachers in this country as their are software engineers, and it's pretty obvious what influence they have on our next generation. Much more so than the vague words I get about 'representation' and 'perspective' when talking about the supposed issue in software. You have to really want men to be in the wrong to pick software out of these two industries.
> Put another way: men weren't too upset about being pushed out of teaching positions because they were able to make better money elsewhere.
Seriously, there's no grand conspiracy. Men aren't an organized interchangeable mass that wants to put you down. If men are turned out of teaching those men don't suddenly become qualified engineers. These are different men.
I don't know why this is so hard for you to grasp, but we're individuals.
> They also came up with other great ideas, including adding a tool that automates the first coding task and removes a candidate’s identifying information. Based on the feedback, we’ve implemented a number of changes to our internal process for recruiting.
At no point do they say they implemented removing candidate information. They say it was suggested, and then _separately_ they state they implemented a number of changes.
You can't randomly pick 50:50 out of 18:82 and they very much didn't.