So you worked with film at the apex of its technological development and that makes you an expert on the beginning of the color era, when that technology was exceptionally expensive?
Everyone needs someone saying something like the N word in an official document before they can buy that racism exists. It's not possible that capital follows racial lines (spoiler: it does) and that therefore incentivized products to develop in a particular direction, to appeal to the folks with money? You don't need "overt racism." You don't need a guy twirling his mustache, spouting white supremacist rants.
So to your mind it's more likely that the author is telling fish stories than it is the dominant financial caste ended up optimizing a given piece of tech to their best interest?
It's hardly an accident that one of the most successful capitalist systems in the history of the world has, since the automation of agriculture, shifted to storing millions of people (read: excess labor) in a vast, growing prison system.
I'm afraid this isn't going to produce much beyond anxiety in your candidates. This leads to the sort of interaction where I'd end the interview early, thank the interviewer for their time, and high-tail it out of there never to return.
It's a trivia quiz. And frankly, who cares if you know what iBeacons are? What's the likelihood a project requires knowledge of both iBeacons and HealthKit?
HealthKit AND HomeKit?
HomeKit AND Apple Pay?
Why ask about something as deeply specialized as Metal, a brand new 3D graphics API, when so few projects are likely even to need it—except in game dev shops?
And in what conceivable universe does someone need to know the screen resolutions of any given piece of hardware? I've been building iOS apps for six years now, and I barely remember at any given moment.
Anyone looking for great interview questions for iOS devs should instead consult Black Pixel's excellent post here:
This is called the pipeline fallacy and ignores that companies hire at dramatically lower rates (0%-2% for blacks, 2%-3% for latinos) than there are graduates (4%-8%, depending on your source) for a given underrepresented background
His words speak for themselves. His profile announced his role and place of work.
So, for me, as a person who's got a couple layers of outsider-ness from the typical tech workforce, I would be extremely uncomfortable working with this person. This is a person who made clear they supported public forums being open for bigots to say what they like.
So they can be educated.
Dang. That's awful. It suggests a terrifying lack of empathy. It's something I would want to know about. And certainly not something I'd want in a colleague.
Freedom to speak is not freedom from accountability.
I'm here to fight marginalization. That's my fight, too. In quite a big way.
I respect that your approach may be different from my own—as marginalized individuals, we do have common cause.
You can and should view HN however you'd like. But there's a lot to be angry about on the merits. And a lot to be angry about when those problems are excused or dismissed. I can't apologize for that. And I must maintain my original position: I would loathe to work with someone who is this unaware.
Where I do apologize is if my tone carried a righteousness you found alienating, and if my frustrated words denied you the sense of solidarity I would aspire to offer. That's crummy and worth examination.
> You know nothing about me except that I criticized your post for being misrepresentative. That's all.
I know you made the top comment on my article say you're glad when people say bigoted things so that the folks most impacted by them have to donate time to educating them. 'Bout all I really need.
> There are much more effective, humane ways to win the hearts and minds of others and achieve your goals.
Did you miss the part where I said that wasn't anything close to my goal?
Again: I expect people to demand the right things because they're the right things. Not because people are "nice" or not.
> you call me more names
Citation needed.
> When I say that I feel victimized by you
Whew. The privilege to call being disagreed with "victimization." Incredible. Tech in a nutshell, right here.
> Did I really deserve what Danilo threw at me today?
> Twitter privilege
Goodness. If anything, you got off easy, bub. Even now, oblivious, invoking concepts like "privilege" you clearly don't understand.
You don't get to run your mouth about things you don't understand and then escape accountability. You don't get to excuse a terrible status quo as being acceptable because it serves to educate people at the expense of the marginalized.
You are exactly the problem. Not the bigots. Not the overt sexists. Not the children posing as grownups, too young to know their indecency. The problem is mealy-mouthed folks who mistake differences of power for differences opinion. And who forgive the unacceptable on that basis.
And feel so righteous doing so.
Sorry if that's not the sort of coddling you're used to. But I'm not here for you. I'm not here to make you comfortable and I'm certainly not here to persuade you. I'm here because what you said was wrong and dangerous.
I'm a lot more concerned with the feelings of people who are being driven out of this industry because of exactly the sort of chicanery you're excusing.
Working for you sounds damn crummy. If you don't want that sort of observation leveled in public in the future, I have one suggestion:
read some books
Do the right thing because it's the right thing. Not because someone was nice to you or not on Hacker News.
> threatening my livelihood
And where is the threat to your livelihood, exactly?
If what you said was as acceptable as you claim, you face no danger.
If what you said was problematic, then why did you say it? Publicly? Flying under the banner of "Lead Software Engineer for Everlaw."
And why would you expect a public wrong to pass with impunity?
You're arguing both that you were perfectly reasonable—and that I was unreasonable to call you out for saying something crummy.
Working for someone who thinks this exercise has been "cherry picking," who thinks it's the job of marginalized people to educate bigots, would be a horror show. Especially given the lack of self-awareness you've displayed here. Saying so is not only okay—it's necessary.
> Rape has meanings other than non-consensual sex.
GP: Please use the word rape to the full extent provided by the english language, and let those who don't like the word deal with it.
I'm not here to have a "discussion" with someone who's desperate to defend the powerful from facing their own malfeasance. Your remarks and lack of self-awareness show that you're part of the problem. I don't see any benefit to investing meaningful time in reaching you.
I've provided a case and actionable suggestions here, at a length of 745 words. I'm not going to give you 745 more.
I'm not here to convince you. Your education is your job.
But I am thrilled to continue documenting how, say, software engineering leaders at startups contribute to a culture of exclusion and alienation by making it the jobs of marginalized people to "educate" their more privileged counterparts.
Um. For a long time they were. Public pools were subject to racial segregation.
Glad we have an expert on racism like yourself to help set us all straight here!