MESO-Rx

Anabolic Steroids

Qingdao Sigma Chemical Co., Ltd (International, US, EU, Canada and Australia domestic

I recently saw a thesis on the topic of declining birthrates globally. There are plenty of known causes. Among them are urbanization, women are more well-educated and more frequently focused on careers, rising costs of having children and so on, but those reasons don’t explain it all. The thesis suggested that one common reason is the increasingly political polarization between women and men. Didn’t attempt to verify, but it was good for thought.

As for DEI there’s nothing wrong with it in principle. There’s plenty of conscious and subconscious bias that exists that precludes various businesses from considering certain candidates. As practiced however, it has always been performative in my experience.

As such, I have my own approach when making hires. I’ll simply devote extra attention to candidates that might be precluded because of bias. Unfortunately there’s some common trait differentiation that leads to certain genders preferring certain fields over another. Nurses, for example are disproportionately women. In my field, engineers as disproportionately men.

The social justice warriors writing and administering the DEI policies would have me believe that half the qualified candidates I see are talented women excluded because I must be a mouth breathing goon, when often I have 1 woman to every 100 men.

There are other biases that exist as well, in terms of personality and so on. Outspoken, overconfident bullshit artists tend to be over represented. My last hire was an introverted and shy Asian woman that was interviewed by several other engineers before her resume landed on my desk. Given my “extra attention” policy I mentioned I went through the interviewing notes carefully. The interviewers, including one that was same gender and ethnicity all basically put her on the spot and told her to dance, ie whiteboard code challenges. One interviewer even wrote, “she solved the problem correctly but when I interrogated her about her solution she failed to explain it satisfactorily”.

Anyway, she’s my most productive engineer at the moment.
 
egruberman said:
I recently saw a thesis on the topic of declining birthrates globally. There are plenty of known causes. Among them are urbanization, women are more well-educated and more frequently focused on careers, rising costs of having children and so on, but those reasons don’t explain it all. The thesis suggested that one common reason is the increasingly political polarization between women and men. Didn’t attempt to verify, but it was good for thought.

As for DEI there’s nothing wrong with it in principle. There’s plenty of conscious and subconscious bias that exists that precludes various businesses from considering certain candidates. As practiced however, it has always been performative in my experience.

As such, I have my own approach when making hires. I’ll simply devote extra attention to candidates that might be precluded because of bias. Unfortunately there’s some common trait differentiation that leads to certain genders preferring certain fields over another. Nurses, for example are disproportionately women. In my field, engineers as disproportionately men.

The social justice warriors writing and administering the DEI policies would have me believe that half the qualified candidates I see are talented women excluded because I must be a mouth breathing goon, when often I have 1 woman to every 100 men.

There are other biases that exist as well, in terms of personality and so on. Outspoken, overconfident bullshit artists tend to be over represented. My last hire was an introverted and shy Asian woman that was interviewed by several other engineers before her resume landed on my desk. Given my “extra attention” policy I mentioned I went through the interviewing notes carefully. The interviewers, including one that was same gender and ethnicity all basically put her on the spot and told her to dance, ie whiteboard code challenges. One interviewer even wrote, “she solved the problem correctly but when I interrogated her about her solution she failed to explain it satisfactorily”.

Anyway, she’s my most productive engineer at the moment.
Click to expand...
I’ve never found white boarding to be an effective interview technique. It introduces a weird gamification to interviews that doesn’t really sus out quality engineers. I think the last time I got a white board problem during interview was in 2013 lol
 
egruberman said:
I recently saw a thesis on the topic of declining birthrates globally. There are plenty of known causes. Among them are urbanization, women are more well-educated and more frequently focused on careers, rising costs of having children and so on, but those reasons don’t explain it all. The thesis suggested that one common reason is the increasingly political polarization between women and men. Didn’t attempt to verify, but it was good for thought.

As for DEI there’s nothing wrong with it in principle. There’s plenty of conscious and subconscious bias that exists that precludes various businesses from considering certain candidates. As practiced however, it has always been performative in my experience.

As such, I have my own approach when making hires. I’ll simply devote extra attention to candidates that might be precluded because of bias. Unfortunately there’s some common trait differentiation that leads to certain genders preferring certain fields over another. Nurses, for example are disproportionately women. In my field, engineers as disproportionately men.

The social justice warriors writing and administering the DEI policies would have me believe that half the qualified candidates I see are talented women excluded because I must be a mouth breathing goon, when often I have 1 woman to every 100 men.

There are other biases that exist as well, in terms of personality and so on. Outspoken, overconfident bullshit artists tend to be over represented. My last hire was an introverted and shy Asian woman that was interviewed by several other engineers before her resume landed on my desk. Given my “extra attention” policy I mentioned I went through the interviewing notes carefully. The interviewers, including one that was same gender and ethnicity all basically put her on the spot and told her to dance, ie whiteboard code challenges. One interviewer even wrote, “she solved the problem correctly but when I interrogated her about her solution she failed to explain it satisfactorily”.

Anyway, she’s my most productive engineer at the moment.
Click to expand...
Man if I could get a boss like you, I’d be happy. Tired of BS DE roles these days
 
PermaBlastingTren said:
just checkout how tim horton in canadas doing, oh wait...
Click to expand...
That's a perfect example of what happens when one or 2 Indians are promoted to management positions. Say goodbye to your DEI. Give it a few years and you won't have any more white people working at that business. Walmart, Tim Hortons, Pizza Pizza, name the franchise and if there are 3 indians working there it's already over for that place in terms of diversity. Don't expect to see any articles written in the cbc about that discriminatory horseshit. That would be racist, insensitive, and problematic.
 
Mongo966 said:
That's a perfect example of what happens when one or 2 Indians are promoted to management positions. Say goodbye to your DEI. Give it a few years and you won't have any more white people working at that business. Walmart, Tim Hortons, Pizza Pizza, name the franchise and if there are 3 indians working there it's already over for that place in terms of diversity. Don't expect to see any articles written in the cbc about that discriminatory horseshit. That would be racist, insensitive, and problematic.
Click to expand...
canada, where diversity is 90% of migrants being indian
 
AnTabolic73 said:
How the hell does hiring someone based off their skin color lead to better workers? I'm not saying it's impossible, but if you ended up with better workers, it'd be entirely luck, not because of prejudice hiring practices.
Click to expand...
In the situation I mentioned earlier they weren't hiring the new workers based on the color of their skin, they started hiring from a much larger talent pool, and because of that had access to more top talent than before.
 
AnTabolic73 said:
How the hell does hiring someone based off their skin color lead to better workers? I'm not saying it's impossible, but if you ended up with better workers, it'd be entirely luck, not because of prejudice hiring practices.
Click to expand...

Because the people doing the hiring are morons themselves and almost all people have bias. If left unchecked, they will hire all their inner circle of family and friends which is exactly what happens often.

Its the same reason investors diversify their portfolio via etfs and such. Basically, what we have learned over the decades is that the majority of people are terrible at picking winners and losers and the grand majority of people are NOT self aware of their own bias or stupidity. In fact the inverse is true in many people. In my experience, the stupider a person is, the more assertive and sure of themselves they become. Its a compensation mechanism.

The grand majority of stock pickers under perform the market. This is true for even the richest and most famous investors. Many are surprised at how bad these professionals are after they review their history. Most only got lucky once or twice in their lifetime and failed to out perform afterwards. This is why index investing took off. It doesnt matter whats in the index. All that matters is it is diversified and continuously rebalanced towards diversity. This insures you never have a systemic problem in your portfolio.

As it turns out, this also works in employment. What we are saying is that you should not trust the hiring managers or HR because they are not good at picking people and/or they can be biased or corrupted. So to reduce the odds of bad choices, we diversify across different types of people. Now maybe race isnt a good way to do that. But there is merit to it because race generally comes with differing types of priorities, behavior and attributes.

And yes you are definitely depending on an element of luck. Just like you would when you invest in a diversified fund. You are betting that the diversity will average out good and bad better than without. You are trying to reduce risk. In sports terms, diversification lowers your ceiling but raises your floor, if that makes sense.
 
thejumpingsheep said:
Because the people doing the hiring are morons themselves and almost all people have bias. If left unchecked, they will hire all their inner circle of family and friends which is exactly what happens often.

Its the same reason investors diversify their portfolio via etfs and such. Basically, what we have learned over the decades is that the majority of people are terrible at picking winners and losers and the grand majority of people are NOT self aware of their own bias or stupidity. In fact the inverse is true in many people. In my experience, the stupider a person is, the more assertive and sure of themselves they become. Its a compensation mechanism.

The grand majority of stock pickers under perform the market. This is true for even the richest and most famous investors. Many are surprised at how bad these professionals are after they review their history. Most only got lucky once or twice in their lifetime and failed to out perform afterwards. This is why index investing took off. It doesnt matter whats in the index. All that matters is it is diversified and continuously rebalanced towards diversity. This insures you never have a systemic problem in your portfolio.

As it turns out, this also works in employment. What we are saying is that you should not trust the hiring managers or HR because they are not good at picking people and/or they can be biased or corrupted. So to reduce the odds of bad choices, we diversify across different types of people. Now maybe race isnt a good way to do that. But there is merit to it because race generally comes with differing types of priorities, behavior and attributes.

And yes you are definitely depending on an element of luck. Just like you would when you invest in a diversified fund. You are betting that the diversity will average out good and bad better than without. You are trying to reduce risk. In sports terms, diversification lowers your ceiling but raises your floor, if that makes sense.
Click to expand...
History is filled with examples of blind spots.
There was a drug that researchers assumed was ineffective in black women, simply because researchers didn't account for some black women having bigger bum fat and ended up giving them subq gluteal injections instead of IM like their averagely smaller butt white counterparts. They just went an stated that said drug was less effective in black women.
You would think Drug company scientists wouldn't have such blind spots.
How about Pulse oximeters being thrown off by black skin? yeah. it is a thing. Pulse oximeters can be thrown off by darker skin tones and assume darker skinned people have more oxygen saturation than they actually do.
These are inadvertent problems of not appreciating diversity of populations.

Anyway. DEI is the new demon. There's always new demons plaguing society. Wait till the 'merit system' doesn't favor some folk. All we're gonna start to hear is how some people of merit are more unworthy than other people of merit
 
AnTabolic73 said:
Muslim men are raping and killing white women in the Uk.

I guess no one is allowed to say it.

Now call me xenophobic.
Click to expand...
white men are rapping and beating more woman in uk.....
white men rape native americans
white man raped Vietnamese woman..

what's ur point?

every race and creed has murders.. just fyi. get out of ur echo chamber and travel, like REALLY travel and meet more people...
 
AnTabolic73 said:
How the hell does hiring someone based off their skin color lead to better workers? I'm not saying it's impossible, but if you ended up with better workers, it'd be entirely luck, not because of prejudice hiring practices.
Click to expand...
thats not what DEI is FyI.. ur talking about affirmative action which is racist yes, def helped things become more equal faster after segregation though. the most progressive socialist nations outlawed it. the MAIN thing folks need to worry about is education in USA... unfortunate its not equal access to elementary education in USA.
 
thejumpingsheep said:
Because the people doing the hiring are morons themselves and almost all people have bias. If left unchecked, they will hire all their inner circle of family and friends which is exactly what happens often.

Its the same reason investors diversify their portfolio via etfs and such. Basically, what we have learned over the decades is that the majority of people are terrible at picking winners and losers and the grand majority of people are NOT self aware of their own bias or stupidity. In fact the inverse is true in many people. In my experience, the stupider a person is, the more assertive and sure of themselves they become. Its a compensation mechanism.

The grand majority of stock pickers under perform the market. This is true for even the richest and most famous investors. Many are surprised at how bad these professionals are after they review their history. Most only got lucky once or twice in their lifetime and failed to out perform afterwards. This is why index investing took off. It doesnt matter whats in the index. All that matters is it is diversified and continuously rebalanced towards diversity. This insures you never have a systemic problem in your portfolio.

As it turns out, this also works in employment. What we are saying is that you should not trust the hiring managers or HR because they are not good at picking people and/or they can be biased or corrupted. So to reduce the odds of bad choices, we diversify across different types of people. Now maybe race isnt a good way to do that. But there is merit to it because race generally comes with differing types of priorities, behavior and attributes.

And yes you are definitely depending on an element of luck. Just like you would when you invest in a diversified fund. You are betting that the diversity will average out good and bad better than without. You are trying to reduce risk. In sports terms, diversification lowers your ceiling but raises your floor, if that makes sense.
Click to expand...
It doesn't make sense. When I pick an index fund, it's like investing in every stock available. When I have to choose a DEI hire, say a black person, it's not like hiring in every black person. The idea that any and every company needs to hire a "diversified" bunch of folks, or else it will fail, or won't be as successful as it could be if only it had more blacks, or more Jews, or more whatever, is complete horseshit. And what's also horseshit is the notion that the government is mandating this to ensure a company's performance. Sorry if "horseshit" seems aggressive, I swear I'm not internet yelling at you. But you really did bullshit your entire post. The only part that was truly logical is when you yourself noticed that "race isnt a good way to do that."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
Moonlight Pharmaceuticals - EU based
2
Replies
33
Views
4K
AdonisDad
A
Great Northern Peptides
Great Northern Peptides - Canadian Domestic Peptides
2
Replies
21
Views
1K
Great Northern Peptides
Great Northern Peptides
E
ELF-Farm--International-HGH,Peptides, HGH Raws, peptides raws.
2 3
Replies
46
Views
7K
Elf-farm
E
Driada Britannica
Driada Medical UK & EU
5 6 7
Replies
130
Views
9K
Driada Britannica
Driada Britannica
CanadaPeptide
Canadian Domestic Research Peptide Supplier
2 3 4
Replies
68
Views
8K
CanadaPeptide
CanadaPeptide

Sponsors

Latest posts

Back
Top