Slashdot Mirror


WA Gov. Sides With Microsoft: Philanthropy-Funded K-12 CS Education Now the Law

theodp writes: During public hearings on WA State's House Bill 1813, which took aim at boys' historical over-representation in K-12 computer classes, the Office of the WA State Superintendent of Public Instruction voiced concerns that by relying on the generosity of corporations, wealthy individuals, and nonprofits to fund STEM, computer science, and technology programs, learning opportunities would be limited to a small group of students, creating disparity of opportunity. "If this is a real priority," pleaded Chris Vance, "fund it fully" (HB 1813, like the White House K-12 CS plan, counts on philanthropy to make up for tax shortfalls). But legislators in the WA House and Senate — apparently more swayed by the pro-HB 1813 testimony of representatives from Microsoft and Microsoft-backed TEALS and Code.org — overwhelmingly passed the bill, sending it to Governor Jay Inslee for his signature. Not to worry. On Wednesday, the bill was signed into law by Gov. Inslee, who was perhaps influenced by the we-need-to-pass-HB-1813 blogging of Microsoft General Counsel and Code.org Board member Brad Smith, who coincidentally is not only responsible for Microsoft's philanthropic work, but was also co-chair of Gov.-elect Inslee's transition team. The WA state legislative victory comes less than 24 hours after the San Francisco School Board voted to require CS instruction beginning with preschool.

166 comments

  1. bah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When Microsoft funds computer science and computer literacy education, those classes become commercials for Microsoft.

    1. Re:bah by darkwing_bmf · · Score: 3

      So? If they're going to use anything, they might as well pick the one that's being paid for by someone else. And from what I remember, Apple used to support a lot of schools back in the day (even though ours used PCjrs).

    2. Re:bah by cayenne8 · · Score: 4, Insightful
      So...it appears we now have a clearly legislative act passed that legally discriminates against classes of people.

      It sounds like sorry boys...and likely non-minorities...you just won't get these opportunities because of your sex and possibly even your race.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    3. Re:bah by BK425 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, apple gave education a 30% discount (better in some cases) on hardware. They didn't suggest curriculum or standards, nobody came out to your school to say this kid needs such and so, it was just a huge no strings attached gift of hardware. (my experience circa the mid 80's at Bellevue Community College, buying for the student paper)

    4. Re:bah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Underrated post

    5. Re:bah by dimeglio · · Score: 1

      Not to mention OS orientation.

      --
      Views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of the author.
    6. Re:bah by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 1

      A corporation rams through legislation back by a corporate run "non-profit" and that's your take? Wow....

    7. Re:bah by twistedcubic · · Score: 1

      Maybe so, but when I was in college (early 90s) I recall considering getting one of those Apple Computer Loans for students, for around $3000. And that was the discounted price. So I'm not sure I would call that a "gift", when Amigas and PCs were definitely cheaper. Of course, I didn't get the loan. I just bought a dumb termial ($35) and a Bocamodem ($200) to connect to the VAX on campus.

    8. Re:bah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Microsoft? You mean the company that's open sourcing all kinds of tools and software?

      Sounds like a great thing, kids learn about the value of open source.

    9. Re:bah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only white boys are allowed to take CS? I dare you to find that in the bill. What's that? You can't.

    10. Re:bah by tsotha · · Score: 1

      Where have you been? This is a dog-bites-man story.

      Ultimately it's a big waste of money and time. Computer classes are pointless for kids who aren't interested, and kids who are interested won't have any trouble getting access to a computer - you can hardly avoid them anymore. Cliff Stoll was on target when he addressed the topic in Silicon Snake Oil.

  2. Cognitive Dissonance by wodencafe · · Score: 5, Funny

    Big industry won't be able to claim a shortage of CS workers to justify more H1B visas for long. But by that time, the market will be so over-saturated with software developers, and salaries will plummet - then they won't need H1B visas, because American software devs will be more affordable than foreign workers on H1B visas.

    1. Re:Cognitive Dissonance by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 2

      Big industry won't be able to claim a shortage of CS workers to justify more H1B visas for long.

      Sure they will. They'll be able to claim anything they want and with their money they will have plenty of receptive ears.

    2. Re:Cognitive Dissonance by plopez · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The market is already saturated, by clueless newbie lee7 wannabes. We need quality not quantity. It was quantity over quality that devastated the American car industry. If we have quality everything else will fall into place.

      --
      putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
    3. Re:Cognitive Dissonance by koan · · Score: 2

      Doesn't matter, TISA is going to simplify the process and there will be a flood of foreign workers, why do you think they are keeping it "secret".

      --
      "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
    4. Re:Cognitive Dissonance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's wrong with that? At the least jobs will stay in the country and no one will be going home, with all the knowledge gained, after two years. I wish we had more doctors and lawyers so they could be more affordable.

    5. Re: Cognitive Dissonance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Craftsmen engineers always need qualified technicians.

    6. Re:Cognitive Dissonance by knightghost · · Score: 1

      Yup!

      What I'd like to know is where's the funds and laws to deal with boys under-representation in achieving college degrees?

    7. Re:Cognitive Dissonance by mikael · · Score: 1

      The foreign workers will always be more willing to shack up four to a room.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    8. Re:Cognitive Dissonance by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It is actually worse. We're funding education for the next 20 years, based on what the past 20 years were like. Think about it for a second, we are reflexively thinking that our world in 20 years will resemble our world from 20 years ago (40 year gap). This is fairly short sighted and is always the case with education, we're teaching our kids like we should have been educated, but not according to how they need to be educated.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    9. Re:Cognitive Dissonance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a point of reference, 40 years ago, the Z-80 was still a year away from being released.

    10. Re:Cognitive Dissonance by Thundercleets · · Score: 1

      They will not be software engineers they will be asking folks if the want fires with that. One of the many fails with outsourcing and H1B is that after destroying an industry the visa people can go home and outsource slave shops can just lay off. Regardless, the cost of living will make sure they kill off any interest inworking in an industry they target in the US.

    11. Re: Cognitive Dissonance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Having minimum wage jobs with terrible hours and conditions isn't really better than having none. If the jobs leave there's pressure for revolution.

      The middle class is the main thing standing between the rich and the angry villagers with their pitchforks.

      The US has no upward mobility and is aggressively destroying opportunities for making a decent living.

    12. Re:Cognitive Dissonance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, perhaps the industry needs to actually start hiring over 30s, instead of looking for "freshers" and telling people my age, "you're not a good fit for the office culture," or asking questions like, "so when did you graduate high school?" The problem is the .1% corporate greedy bottom feeders that want to suck the world dry of all its cheap labor and resources as they fatten their portfolios and leave devastated economies in their wake. You know what a good trade to learn is? The construction and maintenance of guillotines. I suspect that's soon going to become one hell of a workers' market. Of course, it'll just be another bubble, but it's one of those bubbles you like to pop every now and again.

  3. I don't see this working by Cpt_Kirks · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Females simply don't seem to like software development work much.

    Female developers tend to move away from development into project management, as soon as they can.

    Sure call my sexist, misogynist, whatever. I've been a developer for over 25 years, and am just reporting what I have seen.

    At least this won't take too much in the way of tax dollars.

    1. Re: I don't see this working by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Women tend to gravitate towards easy, risk-free, non-competitive, unprofitable projects. Provide free money for no work in female-only environments and women may very well gravitate towards them.

    2. Re: I don't see this working by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      > Women are also implicitly discriminated against by the traditional "boys only club" mentality that predominates the technology and science cultures.

      This is a complete lie. Studies on women in CS show that they dislike the same things that men are willing to tolerate from their projects and management. Women call that discrimination, men call it bad working conditions.

    3. Re: I don't see this working by NotDrWho · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Provide meaningful projects in gender-neutral environments and women may very well gravitate towards them.

      Well that should be pretty easy. We just need to send a memo to the vast, vast majority of companies and agencies doing regular day-to-day programming tasks and tell them they need to save the world instead.

      --
      SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    4. Re:I don't see this working by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Sure call my sexist, misogynist, whatever.

      OK, so your "whatever" is sexist and mysogynist, but what should we call it?

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    5. Re:I don't see this working by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      Women were involved in computing 40+ years ago, back when "programmers" were basically typists and the profession was generally considered a secretarial function.

      FTFY

    6. Re: I don't see this working by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      People tend to gravitate towards easy, risk-free, non-competitive, unprofitable projects. Provide free money for no work in any environment and people may very well gravitate towards them.

      There FTFY..

    7. Re: I don't see this working by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Women tend to gravitate towards meaningful projects.

      Define "meaningful".

      Do you mean something that women themselves would consider meaningful, or something that their employer would consider meaningful? (For example, if a project saves the company money, then the employer will consider the project to be meaningful.) Or do you believe that there are certain sorts of projects that women themselves consider to be more meaningful? (For example, do you believe that a project that helps poor starving children is more meaningful for women than a project to make the next super-cool flashy app?) Or are you using "meaningful" as a synonym for "high-status"?

    8. Re:I don't see this working by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Females simply don't seem to like software development work much.

      Female developers tend to move away from development into project management, as soon as they can.

      You describe all of engineering, not just software development: I've seen a lot women grads jump ship to Projects within a couple years of doing actual engineering work after college. Not just at this company either, I've kept track of a lot of my classmates via LinkedIn and it's a very common trend.

    9. Re:I don't see this working by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's too bad Grace Hopper isn't alive anymore to slap the stupid out of you.

    10. Re: I don't see this working by sdguero · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Bullshit. I work with a few women developers/testers (5 our of the 40 software engineers on our floor) and they is no "boys only club" mentality. Sure their might be the occaisional off color joke that appeals to men more than women, but over all they are well respected and treated as equals. It's like when my fiancee and her friends are hanging out and they make a joke that appeals to women more than men. Do I get offended and call them sexist because they made joke from the female perspective that doesn't apppeal to me as much as them? No, because that would be abrasive and lame.

      If anything I'd say the women I work with are given more slack and more respect than the male developers. I have never seen anyone jump on any of the female engineers here (or anywhere I've worked) for making a mistake. Yet I have seen that happen to male engineers quite a bit, where a colleague or manager forces them to admit to a technical transgression, which sucks because now that female engineer might not learn as much from her mistake. In my experience, male engineers avoid confrontation with women in the workplace, even when it would be constructive.

      I agree with OP, most women just don't want to work on the technical side of software development, and the majority of women that I have seen come into software engineering as interns or associate devs have ended up in project maangement. Hell, most men don't want to be software engineers, but there is a minority of men and even smaller minority of women that just have the knack for it. Forcing women who aren't interested into the feild and will make poor engineers is not the answer. If anything that will cause the men to discount minority of talented women (and treat them even more differently than they do now) that deserve to be in the feild.

    11. Re:I don't see this working by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      If you don't know what you're talking about, then goddamit don't post.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    12. Re:I don't see this working by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

      Sure call my sexist, misogynist, whatever.

      OK, so your "whatever" is sexist and mysogynist, but what should we call it?

      I thought he meant to give it a ring, but didn't leave a number. :-p

      Now cue the "grammar nazi" remarks... but we're just having a little silly fun.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    13. Re: I don't see this working by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's like when my fiancee and her friends are hanging out and they make a joke that appeals to women more than men.

      Not the same thing. When women do that, it's empowering.

    14. Re: I don't see this working by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, wish I had modpoints. +1 True

    15. Re:I don't see this working by mikael · · Score: 1

      I remember those days. If you look at the Byte adverts from that time, the industry was mainly COBOL, FORTRAN-77, punch cards, tape drives and mainframes. PC clones and home computers didn't exist except S-100 systems and desktop calculators. Computer science departments were usually part of the Mathematics or Electrical/Hardware Engineering departments, so they took their work really really seriously. Local jobs advertised were the Programmer/Analyst/Architect/Consultant.

      Now, Computer Science will cover everything from web page design to mobile apps and gaming.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    16. Re:I don't see this working by Cpt_Kirks · · Score: 1

      Sure call my sexist, misogynist, whatever.

      OK, so your "whatever" is sexist and mysogynist, but what should we call it?

      "Mjölnir"

    17. Re:I don't see this working by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Women are already dwarfing men in enrollment and graduation rates in colleges. I guess this is just sealing the deal. Fuck men.

    18. Re:I don't see this working by nbauman · · Score: 3, Funny

      You fall in love with them, they fall in love with you, and when you criticize them they cry.

    19. Re:I don't see this working by nbauman · · Score: 3, Informative

      Females simply don't seem to like software development work much.

      Female developers tend to move away from development into project management, as soon as they can.

      You describe all of engineering, not just software development: I've seen a lot women grads jump ship to Projects within a couple years of doing actual engineering work after college. Not just at this company either, I've kept track of a lot of my classmates via LinkedIn and it's a very common trend.

      I once worked in a company that evaluated new technology for investors. We were writing reports in a Wall Street office. One of my co-workers was a woman with an engineering degree. After she graduated, she got a job in engineering. The way she described it, she sounded like a parody of Cosmopolitan. "I had to go out on the factory floor! I had to wear a helmet!" The kind of thing that I thought was cool, she thought was horrible. So she got a desk job with us.

      There are good women engineers, but they're rare, and hands-on women engineers are even rarer. Many male engineers move into management or support roles, and they're useful too. But every female engineer I've met was in a management job where they didn't do things hands-on.

      That's my experience. I wonder if anyone has done a formal scientific study.

    20. Re:I don't see this working by Cpt_Kirks · · Score: 1

      Women are already dwarfing men in enrollment and graduation rates in colleges. I guess this is just sealing the deal. Fuck men.

      Can you provide some statistics as to exactly what fields they are graduating in?

      I would be willing to bet STEM fields are very far down the list.

      As to your last statement, it is kind of hard to tell if you are suffer from misandry, or are just horny.

    21. Re: I don't see this working by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Meaningful as in providing a sense of accomplishment and intrinsic importance (what it is that an individual intrinsically considers meaningful is irrelevant to my statement).

      I still have no idea what you're talking about, and the link that you provide isn't any better. (It says "Women were
      significantly more likely to value jobs that provide a sense of accomplishment" and that "women value intrinsic rewards".)

      What sorts of projects would be meaningful, intrsically important, or provide women with a sense of accomplishment? What sorts of projects would not be meaningful? Could you at least give some examples, because I don't have a clue?

    22. Re: I don't see this working by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One example: let's say that there is a woman that is concerned about social welfare and she is presented with two jobs: one for using Angular with NoSQL to build a business efficient widget and the other job is to use technology to help a business create jobs. She might be more inclined to take the latter job.

    23. Re:I don't see this working by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 1

      How about stupid if you think that's the take away...

    24. Re:I don't see this working by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its too bad you don't know what the word "generally" means

    25. Re: I don't see this working by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And which group is doing more to improve those working conditions? The women who are refusing the jobs because of them? Or the men who whine about how bad their job is, but keep putting up with the same shitty conditions year after year?

      Men should be *thanking* women for refusing to work under these conditions - corporations that want to achieve a more diverse workforce will find that they have to improve their working conditions, which means that *every* employee benefits.

      You're welcome, cocks.

    26. Re: I don't see this working by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And which group is doing more to improve those working conditions? The women who are refusing the jobs because of them? Or the men who whine about how bad their job is, but keep putting up with the same shitty conditions year after year?

      Neither. The men aren't helping for obvious reasons. Women who entered the field but avoided particular businesses might have brought attention to poor working conditions, but the near absence of women has instead caused the prevailing theory (incorrectly or no) to be systemic sexual discrimination.

    27. Re:I don't see this working by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You'd better not say what you've seen if it conflicts with slashdot wisdom. We're not interested in what _is_ here so much as what we'd like to be. It seems to me that if women don't like to program ... changing that is more important than what anyone thinks, including them. They should be fined and imprisoned if that's what it will take to get them to code.

    28. Re:I don't see this working by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I moved into specialism.

      I have joined the group of bitter, angry women, who doesn't care about looks, with hair growing in my armpits, that has final say in the backend of my system area.

      Fuck you.

    29. Re:I don't see this working by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The reason women move and are tapped for project management is that there's a perception that they are better at dealing with people and handle administrative tasks better because they pay more attention to detail. I say perception because that's all it is - there's usually little or no basis for it other than you are of the opposite gender and everyone realizes that they just can't only ask you to make coffee. Plus guys simply don't like these tasks. If you are the lone female given a task to do with guys very often you will be pushed into documentation or managing the project just so you can stay on the team. I have had to deal with this for 30 years in the tech field both as a developer and as computer technician. I still remember bringing in code, having my team mates tear it apart completely only to rewrite it exactly as I had done. And when I pointed it out, I was met with dead silence. In all my years in the tech field, I can only remember one time where I felt I didn't have to fight for any ounce of respect or acknowledgement. I had to always give 200% and expect little or nothing in return. And, because I didn't have the same outside interests (hunting, motorcycles, automobiles, golfing, tennis) as the guys, I missed out on a lot of "deals" that happened at those events. What I find ironic is that at my first job for an actuarial department, I worked with a woman who had totally set up the actuarial department for the company. Yet she never made it past department supervisor. She was smart, competent, efficient with a wicked sense of humor. She trained every single vice-president at that company, but was never allowed to become a vice-president herself. I left the company largely because of it. Now I'm looking at retirement myself and have come to the realization that something very similar has happened to me.

    30. Re: I don't see this working by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      systemic sexual discrimination.

      Sexual discrimination comes in many forms. If you are the CEO of a company, and the working conditions at your company are so awful for women that they literally refuse to work for your company, how is that not a sexually discriminating environment? You have LITERALLY argued that an entire gender choosing to not work in a field is somehow not indicative of a discriminatory environment, when the evidence suggests that the environment, again, LITERALLY discourages that entire gender from choosing to work there.

      Given the MRA howls of outrage whenever this sort of thing comes up, I'm guessing that if there was an industry that was so heavily geared towards women, they would see absolutely nothing surprising that men would simply "go their own way" (LOL!) and avoid that industry - because it was discriminatory and hostile to men and their precious rights. But when women do the same thing... it's somehow not indicative of a problem?

    31. Re:I don't see this working by beastofburdon · · Score: 1

      Maybe that has something to do with the fact that they don't want to be in those fields. Men and women are equal, that does not mean we are the same.

  4. The future H1-B trainers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Industry will be happy because they will have a large pool of people to train their H1-B replacements.

  5. Philanthropy-Funded? by fustakrakich · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That will mean "Philanthropy" controlled.

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  6. OK by koan · · Score: 4, Informative

    So CS classes are critical for our future, while at the same time H1B's are replacing Americans (Disney) and the latest leak of TISA shows they may be simplifying the ability to bring in foreign workers.

    in its Schedule, Parties shall allow entry and temporary stay of [contractual service
    suppliers and independent professionals 3 ] for a minimum of [X%] of the following
    sectors/sub-sectors:
    Final wording subject to further discussion, including on the cross-reference to categories in the AU
    submission on the temporary entry categories.
    4-FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY-
    LIMITED
    TISA/DEC.2014/negotiating text/MNP
    as of 13 February, 2015
    Without Prejudice
    Computer and related services:
    9. Consultancy services related to the installation of computer hardware (CPC 841)
    10. Software implementation services (CPC 842)
    11. Data processing services (CPC 843)
    12. Data base services (CPC 844)
    13. Other (CPC 845+849)
    Research and Development services:
    14. R&D services on natural sciences (CPC 851)
    15. R&D services on social sciences and humanities (CPC 852)
    16. Interdisciplinary R&D services (CPC 853)

    Huh?

    --
    "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
    1. Re:OK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Wow,

      That is about as clear as the original poster was in announcing what Washington state was doing. I am still not sure if the philanthropy backed education is designed to shut boys out the way so many of the recent efforts have done.

      I do see a lot of prejudiced BS going on.

    2. Re:OK by DoofusOfDeath · · Score: 1

      So CS classes are critical for our future, while at the same time H1B's are replacing Americans (Disney) and the latest leak of TISA shows they may be simplifying the ability to bring in foreign workers.

      You seem to have misunderstood. s/our future/stockholder returns/

    3. Re:OK by koan · · Score: 1

      Oh they meant the royal "our".

      --
      "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
    4. Re:OK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The TISA is easier to understand from the perspective that a foreign power is attempting to weaken us prior to invasion.

      This next presidential election should be interesting. Last one had less than 40% turnout, and this time around we saw what "hope and change" brought us.

      It's quite possible this time around we could get a madman.

  7. WA Govt? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    West Australia?

    1. Re:WA Govt? by talis9 · · Score: 0

      Being in Western Australia, it's always annoyed me when US-ians refer to Washington as WA as if no one else uses that abbreviation

  8. Grammar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    During public hearings on WA State's House Bill 1813, which took aim at boy's historical over-representation in K-12 computer classes

    That should be boys' , not boy's .

    1. Re:Grammar by pushing-robot · · Score: 1

      No, it's only one boy, the one on the poster.

      --
      How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
    2. Re:Grammar by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 1

      During public hearings on WA State's House Bill 1813, which took aim at boy's historical over-representation in K-12 computer classes

      That should be boys', not boy's.

      Well, either that, or it's a capitalization error. ("Boy's"?) Perhaps TFS is really a complaint about the overuse of Boy George's music in K-12 computer classes.

      With Timothy editing the summary, you never can be sure what he's talking about....

  9. CS Education in the womb by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And hormone treatments to turn boys into girls to balance out the profession

  10. Male-ness is a Secondary Characteristic by eepok · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "During public hearings on WA State's House Bill 1813, which took aim at boy's historical over-representation in K-12 computer classes, the Office of the WA State Superintendent of Public Instruction voiced concerns..."

    My problem with the whole "there aren't enough girls in CS" thing is that everyone assumes that males are specifically targeted and tracked into computer-related academic/research/career paths. That's not the case. By and large, it's social outcasts who take up computers as a hobby are tracked into computer-related academic/research/career paths and those social outcasts are more commonly male.

    And they will continue to be male. And social outcasts.

    So, at best, these kinds of initiatives will just track more female social outcasts into computer-oriented subjects/careers. Want more "normal people" in computer-oriented careers? Fat chance, buddy.

    1. Re:Male-ness is a Secondary Characteristic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      By and large, it's social outcasts who take up computers as a hobby are tracked into computer-related academic/research/career paths and those social outcasts are more commonly male.

      Exactly. And when they say that "women are being descriminated against", they really mean that "women don't want to associate with social outcasts".

    2. Re:Male-ness is a Secondary Characteristic by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 2

      Why does nobody ever worry about boys under-representation on things, like Nursing ?

      I mean, I know the reason why there are disparities between genders in certain fields, and it isn't representative of some hidden misogynist agenda of the HeMan Woman's Haters Club. The fact is, that there are Gender Attractions to certain kinds of work, and why can't we just leave it at that.

      Men and Women tend to be different.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    3. Re:Male-ness is a Secondary Characteristic by eepok · · Score: 1

      And understandably so. Social outcast computer guys get resentful. They've been bullied, teased, excluded, derided, mocked, beat up, put down, scoffed at, and turned down for their acne, facial features, natural geeky curiosity, and (sometimes) poor hygiene and poverty.

      Those that turn to computers as a safe, solo hobby eventually find each other. They commiserate. They create their own social norms and mores. These are not common social norms because "common society" rejected them back in middle school and high school.

      It should serve as no surprise that when, in college or professional careers, some women actually want in on the computer industry, they have to wade into the dungeon of outcasts and deal with the stench of their resentment. The first to tread in can, hopefully, make a difference. But they have a lot of baggage to deal with.

      You can even see this at fan conventions when "normal" looking girls get scoffed at for being bandwagonners because it is so incredibly difficult for the outcasts to believe that the people that look just like those who excluded them down throughout their adolescence could actually and genuinely have similar interests to their own.

      None of that justifies any action taken against attempts at considerate nerd re-integration, but if you don't understand all of that before actually trying to make a change, you're going to be doomed to failure.

      If people REALLY want to foster a better, more inclusive environment for all people in the computer industry, they need to foster a better, more inclusive environment for the young people that first choose the computer industry as a hobby. Prevent the de-socialization of those who would otherwise be social outcast computer nerds and you'll be working toward a better computer industry for the future.

      But that's only if you want to do the hard work to solve the problem for everyone and not just take up a crusade for a certain few.

    4. Re:Male-ness is a Secondary Characteristic by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

      My problem with the whole "there aren't enough girls in CS" thing is that everyone assumes that males are specifically targeted and tracked into computer-related academic/research/career paths.

      Well that's not really a problem. Even if there's not a natural 50/50 ratio of males/females that want to go into computer-related careers, now that it's a law, the government will be able to force girls to choose those careers at gunpoint if needs be.

    5. Re:Male-ness is a Secondary Characteristic by LaurenCates · · Score: 1

      Because women need "better" representation in fields that provide the potential to make "more money".

      Pretty funny, huh?

      I mean it couldn't be that a certain stripe of feminists have bought into that idea while some self-serving politicians are trying to drive down salaries by saturating the market with sub-standard labor, could it? Because otherwise, we'd be seeing women push for more women in the trades, huh?

      And that wouldn't be nearly as funny either.

      --
      Some people don't believe in fairies. I don't believe in The Patriarchy.
    6. Re:Male-ness is a Secondary Characteristic by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      That's fine as long as the "Men and women tend to be different" for non-discriminatory differences.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    7. Re:Male-ness is a Secondary Characteristic by eepok · · Score: 2, Insightful

      To speak to the nursing, the greater problem presented in that industry tends to be that there are more practicing male MDs than female MDs with females being weeded out and eventually going into nursing. So, it gets spun from "not enough males in nursing" to "women get forced out of MDs and over-saturate nursing".

      I agree that males and females tend to be different, but a lot of that has to do with upbringing. How many people can honestly say that if their male child wanted to play with dolls and be a nurse, that they would foster it? Not many. Most would keep the dolls away, direct the kid into the hard sciences, and hope he becomes an MD or medical researcher.

      If little females did that, "Well great!", right?

      We should never discount the effects our own gender biases have on steering our children into their careers down the line. It's still pretty taboo to say, but I'd put at least 40% of the blame of sex-separated industries on the upbringing that those industry's workers.

      Blame the old parents and instruct the new parents to lay off the gender-specific career focii, that's what I say. Let the girl play with tools and computers. Let the boy play nurse and care for babies. The boomers had to deal with their daughters choosing to go to college and having a career instead of staying home and having babies. This generation will have to deal with their daughters becoming computer nerds and their sons teaching kindergarten.

    8. Re:Male-ness is a Secondary Characteristic by FearTheDonut · · Score: 1

      Redundantly, at the risk of being redundant, there is concern over a lack of men in nursing. Men are especially valued specializations requiring heavy lifting (traditionally, post-op orthopaedic floors, rehab, some medical floors). There isn't nearly as many resources being put to men in nursing as there seems to be women going into "Computer Science." I put quotes on that, since many of the 'civilians' I talk to think Computer Science is one and the same as web and 'app' development.

    9. Re:Male-ness is a Secondary Characteristic by eepok · · Score: 1

      Bad form.

      You chose to berate the poster and (likely) have him become hostile to you (and, by proxy, your viewpoint) when you could have simply presented the information that assert you've seen.

      "Hey, did you hear pigs fly now? I've heard it said a lot."
      "You fracking idiot! You believe everything people say? You're so ignorant! Look up the pig research!"

      OR

      "Hey, did you hear pigs fly now? I've heard it said a lot."
      "I've heard that a lot, too, but I found this data that shows there's just a perception issue. Apparently, someone's been chucking pigs in the air over highly-populated areas. Check out the link."

      The choice is yours.

    10. Re:Male-ness is a Secondary Characteristic by eepok · · Score: 1

      Speaking of the "heavy lifting" requirement, nothing would make me happier than seeing better female representation in heavy/hard labor industries. There have been some highly visible construction industry cases wherein females in the industry were treated inappropriately. But those women were setting the groundwork.

      Then there's plumbing, sewage, heavy machinery, roadwork, waste management, etc.

      Those are the high visibility and hard working positions that, if females started competing for, males would take notice and give proper respect.

      I would be proud as all hell if my future daughter did roadwork.

    11. Re:Male-ness is a Secondary Characteristic by pla · · Score: 1

      Because women need "better" representation in fields that provide the potential to make "more money".

      You don't know many nurses, do you?

    12. Re:Male-ness is a Secondary Characteristic by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      You chose to berate the poster and (likely) have him become hostile to you (and, by proxy, your viewpoint) when you could have simply presented the information that assert you've seen.

      I havbe done what you suggestes, as have many others before. Many times before.

      The OP was too lazy to either remember previous threads he's been in or perform a 5 second web search to verify his own statements.

      So, I give up.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    13. Re:Male-ness is a Secondary Characteristic by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 0

      Well, if the liberal Politicians in DC were so hung up on Women's equality in pay, then they would pay their women staffers the same as the male staffers, but ... they don't.

      And if women do really work for less, then any bright American Entrepreneur type would hire only women, because it would cost them less, giving them a substantial advantage in the marketplace.

      However, those things are NOT true. A man typically works every day possible (gaining experience), and women take time off to have kids and whatnot. The fact is, men's priorities are always the same as women's priorities. Again, Gender Attractions and men and women tend to be different.

      It isn't always HeMan's Women Haters Club conspiracy. And again, it doesn't speak to workplaces that are woman dominated, like cosmetology and nursing. Where nobody complains about over representation.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    14. Re:Male-ness is a Secondary Characteristic by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 2

      I just attended a nursing graduation at a local University. Probably 10-1 Female to Male Graduates. (rough estimate). Tell me again how men are represented adequately in Nursing? The link below says it is 85% (close to my guestimate)

      http://www.randalolson.com/201...

      1) Health Professions (85% women): nursing assistant, veterinary assistant, dental assistant, etc.

      Females have better representation in Engineering and Computer Science (18-19%) than males do in Nursing.

      And I can come up with a whole slew of possible reason why women shy away from certain kinds of jobs, and are more attracted to others. Here is a good example, women tend to be more social than men. They need the company of other people. So then are attracted to jobs that have more social interactions than jobs that don't have much social interactions. This has nothing to do with ability. When women find out that there is not much social interactions in programming ... well they are not all that excited about it.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    15. Re:Male-ness is a Secondary Characteristic by LaurenCates · · Score: 1

      No, I'm an engineer. I know jack about nursing, but so does any politician bending over backwards to get people behind STEM initiatives.

      What I know is that STEM is played up as somehow "glamorous"...here we are, the engineers and scientists of the world, the cultural elite, the "geek chic", the ones who make all the money and get all the visibility and notoriety. We're "rock stars" and "ninjas".

      Being in STEM, according to politicians, not only confers money, but status. If that wasn't the case, why not push for more nurses? And I'm not saying for boys, I'm saying for all kids. Because it's not "cool" enough.

      --
      Some people don't believe in fairies. I don't believe in The Patriarchy.
    16. Re:Male-ness is a Secondary Characteristic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you seen what nurses can make now? I'm almost ready to swtich trades myself!

    17. Re:Male-ness is a Secondary Characteristic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here's the problem with what you're saying. If there's this glut of male nurses out there, where are they? Seriously. Go into any hospital or medical care facility of any kind and look. Visiting my grandma shortly before she passed, almost all women. Visiting my mom after hip surgery, 1 male nurse, so many female nurses I couldn't count. Go out for lunch and see a group of people in scrubs, always all female.

      Is it not possible that your source that they're relatively equal was wrong? I know everything I provided is anecdotal, but really, if you want me to believe there's not an imbalance, where are the male nurses? I never see them. Do I just live in the only area where there aren't any?

    18. Re:Male-ness is a Secondary Characteristic by serviscope_minor · · Score: 0

      Tell me again how men are represented adequately in Nursing?

      Perhaps if you learned to read you wouldn't need telling so many things. I didn't claim there was not underrepresentation. I saying that people in fact do worry about the underrepresentation contrary to the uninformed opinions of legions of wretched whiners on slashdot.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    19. Re:Male-ness is a Secondary Characteristic by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      I saying that people in fact do worry about the underrepresentation

      People worry about things way too much. This is normal and natural. I also realize normal and natural is offensive to some people.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    20. Re:Male-ness is a Secondary Characteristic by nbauman · · Score: 1

      Why does nobody ever worry about boys under-representation on things, like Nursing ?

      I mean, I know the reason why there are disparities between genders in certain fields, and it isn't representative of some hidden misogynist agenda of the HeMan Woman's Haters Club. The fact is, that there are Gender Attractions to certain kinds of work, and why can't we just leave it at that.

      Men and Women tend to be different.

      Actually, back in the 1970s and 1980s, there was some discussion in the nursing profession about the overabundance of women. One of the nursing associations had a logo with a stylized design of a nurse, that looked female. After some discussion, they changed the design to make it more androgynous. But the ratio of male to female nurses hasn't changed much.

      I would hypothesize that there was a strong movement to move women into more desirable male occupations. But there was no corresponding movement to move men into more desirable female occupations, like nursing. I don't remember any men suing a nursing school or hospital for not giving equal opportunity to men.

      Another occupation that was female-dominated and highly-paid was secretaries, especially legal and medical secretaries, who were often making more than their fathers. There are fewer secretaries now, but there is still a female predominance.

      I felt then and I still feel that we should encourage people to go into professions that they enjoy and are good at, regardless of sex. But it hasn't happened. It used to bug me that probably half the male nurses and secretaries were straight, but the other half was gay. They were just strongly female occupations. There do seem to be biologically-based preferences.

    21. Re:Male-ness is a Secondary Characteristic by nbauman · · Score: 1

      To speak to the nursing, the greater problem presented in that industry tends to be that there are more practicing male MDs than female MDs with females being weeded out and eventually going into nursing. So, it gets spun from "not enough males in nursing" to "women get forced out of MDs and over-saturate nursing".

      That's not what's happening. Medical schools are admitting as many women as men now. https://www.aamc.org/newsroom/...

      The route to medical school and nursing school are completely different. They draw different people.

      Medical school is a much more intensive course, with more years of clinical training. Most medical students that I know come from upper-class families, where their parents could send them to top K-12 and undergraduate schools, and as we know, family income is the factor most strongly associated with school performance. I know doctors who didn't have loans because their parents could pay their tuition and expenses in cash.

      Nursing school is shorter and less intense. Nurses are more often working-class. It's less expensive (that is, more attainable) and the payback time on your investment is shorter. It's less competitive. It's also easier to take time off from your career and come back. It's less of a career commitment.

      Most nurses I meet are pretty smart. Nurses catch doctors in mistakes. Some of them manage departments, go into research, get PhDs, MBAs, law degrees, etc. (Do you have any idea how hard it is to manage an operating room?) But it's a different career track.

    22. Re:Male-ness is a Secondary Characteristic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People worry about the lack of male nurses in part because strength is actually valuable for some nurse job responsibilities and men tend to be stronger than women. It's not the only problem, but some part is not the lack of make nurses but the lack of strong nurses. More importantly, the historical numbers showing a very different gender balance on both professions gives lie to the "natural" claim and the pattern of high-status/compensation jobs being male dominated should make us suspicious of such claims.

    23. Re:Male-ness is a Secondary Characteristic by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      So, male nurses can do things female nurses can't. And therefore they are deserving of higher pay because they are expected to do more. And therefore there is a discrimination lawsuit waiting when women aren't paid as well as men!

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    24. Re:Male-ness is a Secondary Characteristic by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      That's fine as long as the "Men and women tend to be different" for non-discriminatory differences.

      Define ... non-discriminatory differences?

      How does one tell a gender preference towards solitary work (Computer Programming) or towards social type work (nursing, teachers, social work) verses discrimination based on gender by statistics alone?

      The problem is, that we are ascribing as discriminatory, things that just might be normal and natural, but statistically looks like gender bias. This is my complaint about under-representation claims, based on statistics alone. Yes, they are underrepresented, but maybe it is because of gender selection (preference) trends.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    25. Re:Male-ness is a Secondary Characteristic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They've been bullied, teased, excluded, derided, mocked, beat up, put down, scoffed at, and turned down for their acne, facial features, natural geeky curiosity, and (sometimes) poor hygiene and poverty.

      Which of course is why they turn around and create an environment where anybody unlike them is bullied, teased, excluded, derided, mocked, beat up, put down, scoffed at, and turned down for their clear skin, attractive facial features, natural healthy behaviors, and usually excellent hygiene.

      Fuck you, apologist.

    26. Re:Male-ness is a Secondary Characteristic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nobody's asserting that there's a "glut of men" in nursing. Archangel Michael suggested that "why does nobody seem to care about the lack of men in nursing?" To which serviscope_minor replied, "Whenever somebody says this, people show how that's false, and that people DO care about the lack of men in nursing, and you can't have missed this, as you've been around Slashdot for a while. Google, chump."

      And he's right - people DO care about the lack of men in nursing. You just don't hear about it here in your insular little slashdot bubble.

      There's even an organization dedicated to, and I quote from their own statement of their positions:

      [...]
      2. AAMN exists and is organized to promote the recruitment and retention of men in nursing. We are actively working to position AAMN as the voice for men in nursing, able to speak the needs of and contributions by men as a targeted demographic.

      3. AAMN has been organized for more than three decades. Today we are a vitalized professional nursing organization with a rapidly growing membership base. We are vibrant and prospering.

      [...]

      7. AAMN will further expand on its expertise on men in nursing and promote gender diversity and inclusion. This will lead to improved gender balance in nursing schools and the workforce, gender retention, and gender opportunity.

      Yep, there's nobody who cares about the lack of men in nursing at all. You sure nailed it.

      Well, except for this, headlined "Male Nurses Break Through Barriers to Diversify Profession," with a sub-heading of: "Advocates call on men to join the nursing profession to create a more diverse nursing workforce and help curb a projected shortage of nursing that threatens to undermine care."

      And this, with an abstract that reads: "This literature review examines the ability of the nursing profession to recruit and retain men in nursing schools and in the nursing workforce. The authors consider such educational barriers as role stress, discrimination, and stereotyping, and explore questions of male touch and the capacity of men to care. In identifying challenges faced by men entering or working in a profession in which women predominate, the authors hope to promote actions on the part of nurse leaders, educators, and researchers that may address issues of sex bias and promote greater sexual diversity within nursing."

      Yep, nobody at all cares about the lack of men in nursing. Except the nationwide organization dedicated to it with upwards of 2000 members. And the various articles, both scholarly and popular, which are written about the problem.

      Anybody who claims that "there's never any outcry" over this is ignorant, and guilty of not having performed even the most cursory research. Anybody who *remains* ignorant does so willfully, and loses any possible grant of rationality or logic to their arguments.

    27. Re:Male-ness is a Secondary Characteristic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People worry about things way too much.

      YOU WROTE , above:

      Why does nobody ever worry about boys under-representation on things, like Nursing ?

      When somebody calls you out and points out that plenty of people DO worry about it, you try and pretend like worrying about that is silly? Could you explain in any way that's logical?

    28. Re:Male-ness is a Secondary Characteristic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How does one tell a gender preference towards solitary work (Computer Programming) or towards social type work (nursing, teachers, social work) verses discrimination based on gender by statistics alone?

      Right, because women are always teachers. Well, except for at the university level, where men outnumber women by a wide margin in most technical fields, despite graduating at much more "equal" rates.

      But women are always nurses. Well, except at the administrative level, where men are found in disproportionate numbers.

      Clearly, women have a biological preference for lower paying types of work in every field. LOL, stupid girls. They should just stay home and make sammiches, AMIRITE?

    29. Re:Male-ness is a Secondary Characteristic by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      I don't know why this is modded down to 0 (at this writing). It's on point.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    30. Re:Male-ness is a Secondary Characteristic by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Ah now you're moving the goalposts.

      First youmake a claim. When its obviously not true,you then move to saying it doesn't smtter.

      That's logical fallacy 1.

      Logical fallacy 2 is going for the naturalistic argument. You argue that it's good because it's natural. I therefore invite you to go and get bitten by a king cobra. That's also a perfectly natural thing to happen.

      And since you're a fan of natural things, I take it that you eat raw food and wear no clothes?

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
  11. it should be re-evaluated entirely. by nimbius · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I dont have any issues with additional CS or code education in schools, but we need to reconsider how we go about this. educators should take aim at systemic inequality in the classroom and foster a more collaborative experience for everyone. What we typically get from Microsoft and company is half-assed attempts to make computer science pink, cuddly, and dollhouse-shaped. as fo the whole 'The U.S. is facing a shortage of CS graduates.' drumbeat, it is disingenous in its wording. What Microsoft bemoans is the lack of CS graduates as disposably plentiful and affordable as fry-o-lator cooks at McDonalds. Weve spent so much time asking why everyone doesnt code, that we never stopped to ask if everyone could or even should code.

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
    1. Re:it should be re-evaluated entirely. by CaptainDork · · Score: 3, Interesting

      This.

      It's like sending every kid to piano lessons. Some kids will excel at piano. A damn few. The others will suck and fight the waste of time.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    2. Re:it should be re-evaluated entirely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      But afterward ideally all of them will have some degree of respect for what it takes to play the piano...

  12. Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So they won't be able to fix their car, or their toilet, or do their taxes, or take care of a baby, or know the issues for the next election... but they'll be required to know the basics of writing an app. I can't think of how the U.S. education system could have gotten any more stupid short of making creationism mandatory.

  13. Spending more than you earn by BitZtream · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yea, this is a great thing to teach our kids ... do things you can't afford to do, and force someone else to pay for it or beg for money to do so.

    WTF happened to running a balanced budget and setting a good example to our kids about living within their means, why the fuck are we teaching them in elementary school that you can depend on someone else to give you hand outs to survive.

    Its no wonder the rest of the world likes to take our jobs, we're raising a bunch of dependent babies.

    GIRLS DON'T FUCKING LIKE COMPUTER SCIENCE, GET THE FUCK OVER IT.

    Its not because all men in it are assholes, its BECAUSE THEY DON'T FUCKING LIKE IT. They are wired differently than men, this is a KNOWN AND ACCEPTED FACT to anyone who doesn't have political correctness shoved so far up their ass they can taste it.

    Women do somethings better than men, and like some things men don't like, and dislike some things that men like ... conversely, Men do some things better than women, like things women don't like and dislike some things that men like.

    YES THERE ARE EXCEPTIONS, but those are tiny number and you don't change everything because someone who doesn't even DO CS work thinks there should be more women in CS work.

    Men and women ARE NOT EQUAL. STOP TRYING TO PRETEND THEY ARE.

    If you think men and women are 100% equal, then you haven't paid attention to even basic anatomy.

    I'm not saying one is better than the other, I'm saying they aren't the same and its fucking stupid to keep shoving shit down the throats of one of the sexes just to appease some douche who things he's crusading for the good of all women.

    --
    Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    1. Re:Spending more than you earn by CaptainDork · · Score: 2

      ... this is a KNOWN AND ACCEPTED FACT ...

      I don't know it and I don't accept it.

      Citation, please.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    2. Re:Spending more than you earn by Hevel-Varik · · Score: 1

      Actually in my experience reading emails, the opposite is true, for when I know whether the sender is male or female. That may because woman are more emotional while men are more intellectual. [this double plus un-good though crime has been reported, comrade -- MOT)]

    3. Re:Spending more than you earn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://www.bbc.com/news/health-25198063

    4. Re:Spending more than you earn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All we need to do is figure out how to relate CS to gluing shiny beads on clothing.

    5. Re:Spending more than you earn by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      You're aware that BitZStream is a dude, right?

      That may because woman are more emotional while men are more intellectual.

      whatevs, man.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    6. Re:Spending more than you earn by Hevel-Varik · · Score: 1

      I suspect he is a man, yes. what does that have to do with my post?

    7. Re:Spending more than you earn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where do you see random ? I see emphasis

    8. Re:Spending more than you earn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A single example refutes the trend* you misogynist shitlord!

      *but only in one direction: the one serviscope_minor is arguing.

    9. Re:Spending more than you earn by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      You seemed to entirely miss the point that I was mocking him personally for excessive capitalisation.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    10. Re:Spending more than you earn by Translation+Error · · Score: 1

      GIRLS DON'T FUCKING LIKE COMPUTER SCIENCE, GET THE FUCK OVER IT.

      Its not because all men in it are assholes, its BECAUSE THEY DON'T FUCKING LIKE IT. They are wired differently than men, this is a KNOWN AND ACCEPTED FACT to anyone who doesn't have political correctness shoved so far up their ass they can taste it.

      Absolutely. There obviously can't be any external factors that could discourage girls from getting into computer science.

      --
      When someone says, "Any fool can see ..." they're usually exactly right.
    11. Re:Spending more than you earn by Hevel-Varik · · Score: 1

      ok, sorry, I was speaking to your words not your point.

    12. Re:Spending more than you earn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are wired differently than men, this is a KNOWN AND ACCEPTED FACT to anyone

      Surely you can provide examples of relevant studies that show this shocking discrepancy between men and women?

      Note that I say "RELEVANT" studies. You know, ones that show that "women don't like computers because... tits."

      Because when I look, I find papers like this:

      In this paper, we use meta-analysis to analyze gender differences in recent studies of mathematics performance. First, we meta-analyzed data from 242 studies published between 1990 and 2007, representing the testing of 1,286,350 people. Overall, d = .05, indicating no gender difference, and VR = 1.08, indicating nearly equal male and female variances. Second, we analyzed data from large data sets based on probability sampling of U.S. adolescents over the past 20 years: the NLSY, NELS88, LSAY, and NAEP. Effect sizes for the gender difference ranged between 0.15 and +0.22. Variance ratios ranged from 0.88 to 1.34. Taken together these findings support the view that males and females perform similarly in mathematics.

      Given that Computer Science is a branch of mathematics, I'd say the onus is on you to prove that there's some sort of biological underpinning that causes this "different wiring" to cause women to hate math and science.

    13. Re:Spending more than you earn by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      Boom!

      Prof Heidi Johansen-Berg, a UK expert in neuroscience at the University of Oxford, said the brain was too complex an organ to be able to make broad generalisations.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    14. Re:Spending more than you earn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well I'm glad you at least are being honest about your feelings. I have gotten sick and tired of people telling me they have no problems working with women and then proving by their actions that they do. This is exactly what I have had to put up with in the tech field for 30+ years. Always wondered why I had to fight so hard to be accepted. And of course everyone said to my face that there was no problem with me being a woman. You know, I took calculus my sophomore year in high school, then went on to complete 30+ hours in mathematics courses at a local university. Yet I had to endure an evening with a friend of the family who was an engineer chastizing me for thinking I could possibly be a mathematician. He said something similar to what you said - "women don't have the kind of minds to do mathematics." So I guess I feel a little better now with not being able to get as far as I wanted because I know how people like yourself stacked the deck with your attitudes toward women. So thank you. Now do me and everyone else a favor and try cleaning up your language.

  14. Statists gonna state by mi · · Score: 0

    by relying on the generosity of corporations, wealthy individuals, and nonprofits to fund STEM, computer science, and technology programs, learning opportunities would be limited to a small group of students, creating disparity of opportunity. "If this is a real priority," pleaded Chris Vance, "fund it fully"

    By "fund it fully", of course, he meant, usage of monies collected from citizens at gun-point (as all taxes are collected).

    The lesson here is: be careful with your charity — or the government may decide to make it mandatory for all.

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    1. Re:Statists gonna state by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That sounds like one of Lord Blackthorn's laws of virtue.

    2. Re:Statists gonna state by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Thou shalt donate half of thy income to charity, or thou shalt have no income."

  15. Context by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Some folks may not know this, but WA is currently in a showdown between the judiciary which has ruled that the state is failing to fulfill its constitutional mandate to "fully fund education" and legislators who would rather amputate limbs than raise taxes. Any attempt to fund extra CS education with taxpayer moneys instead of donations from "evil corporations" would have dropped into something approaching a constitutional crisis & died.

  16. Oblig grammar nazi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was trying to figure out which particular individual boy was getting over represented when I realized that " boy's " should be " boys' ", as in the possessive form of "boys" and not "boy".

    The End.

  17. If a software dev make $250-500k a year... by sdguero · · Score: 1

    If Software developers made $250-500k a year, I guarantee there would be no shortage of CS graduates.

    1. Re:If a software dev make $250-500k a year... by ranton · · Score: 1

      If Software developers made $250-500k a year, I guarantee there would be no shortage of CS graduates.

      Of course there would be no shortage, because 80% of current United States CS-related jobs would be off-shored to countries without such outrageous salaries. If you inflate wages above what the market will bear (taking into account the international market), then any industry will suffer the same fate the US auto industry suffered last century.

      --
      -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
    2. Re:If a software dev make $250-500k a year... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most devs don't deserve 100k a year for the same reasons that the french fry guy at McDonalds doesn't deserve 15 dollars an hour. I'm not saying they should be treated like dogs but get over it, devs just aren't that big of a deal.

    3. Re:If a software dev make $250-500k a year... by Howitzer86 · · Score: 1

      Assuming you're talking about an average industry-wide income - I think you can get to that by having a shortage of talented applicants thereby forcing the industry to compete for them.

      If there's a glut of talent, the scramble for the best of that is less intense, and the talent overall is made cheaper.

    4. Re:If a software dev make $250-500k a year... by sls1j · · Score: 1

      Ahh, the dot-com bubble all over again. Between 1996-In 2000 when I was in college it was like that. What happened was lots, and lots, of people in the CS program. The ones chasing the money ended up hating programming, and because of that were horrible at it. When the bubble burst they found themselves out of work and out of the field, and they were probably glad too.

      CS is a special kind of hell for those that aren't passionate about it.

  18. It's a win-win ... by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

    ... Big Business gets to sell stuff, girls get opportunities, schools avoid the stigma of discrimination and get some funding, Big Business says, "This proves how badly we nee H!-B visas in the meantime," ....

    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
  19. One Trick Pony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We need coderzzzzzz! We will pay for coderzzzzzzz. Screw everything else. Don't need spel goode, sinse spel kerekd fixez it fer yew. Artz is fer nemploid peeple. Teechers don kno wat bisnesses kneed. We need coderzzz. Mor meens whee pai les purr koder. Ats gud fer tha botum lyne.

  20. Re:We just discovered the problem! by pla · · Score: 1

    If you were surrounded by people who assumed you were a money-grubbing sleazeball with no interest in the job, and who made comments like this about you, wouldn't you want to leave?

    Why? That doesn't seem to have gotten rid of upper management yet...

  21. Other professions? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Funny, I don't see an effort to get more female roofers, plumbers, electricians, garbage workers, or any other male dominated professions. What makes this one so special? If women don't like a profession, then they don't go into it. Stop trying to force gender equality when it's not wanted nor necessary.

    1. Re:Other professions? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      Funny, I don't see an effort to get more female roofers, plumbers, electricians, garbage workers, or any other male dominated professions. What makes this one so special? If women don't like a profession, then they don't go into it. Stop trying to force gender equality when it's not wanted nor necessary.

      Seriously? If you lived in Seattle, you'd know there are statutes requiring that every government-funded project employ, at a minimum, some specific percentage of minority- and women-owned businesses when hiring contractors, roofers, plumbers, electricians, etc.

      Washington State is a (poorly run) nanny state. I work at UW. This past month, in order to qualify for a $125 "wellness incentive" on my health insurance next year, I had to fill out a "well-being assessment" that, among other things, asked me multiple questions regarding whether I felt "empowered" at work. Based on my answers, one of the suggested activities I could do for credit (in addition to the more reasonable "eat five fruits and vegetables" and "walk at least 35,000 steps a week") was "meet with a mentor". Yeah, you guys can't even agree on a budget but you can spend money developing an overly-simplistic computerized system to pretend you're actually caring for your employees...

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    2. Re:Other professions? by nbauman · · Score: 1

      Washington State is a (poorly run) nanny state. I work at UW. This past month, in order to qualify for a $125 "wellness incentive" on my health insurance next year, I had to fill out a "well-being assessment" that, among other things, asked me multiple questions regarding whether I felt "empowered" at work. Based on my answers, one of the suggested activities I could do for credit (in addition to the more reasonable "eat five fruits and vegetables" and "walk at least 35,000 steps a week") was "meet with a mentor". Yeah, you guys can't even agree on a budget but you can spend money developing an overly-simplistic computerized system to pretend you're actually caring for your employees...

      I wouldn't blame the nanny state for wellness incentives. That started out from the HR departments of the big corporations, as a way to cut health costs. I remember reading about that in BusinessWeek in the 1980s. More recently, I've seen studies of wellness incentives in the New England Journal of Medicine. They vary between being totally useless and having a small effect. Science doesn't know enough about diet to tell you that eating specific foods will improve your health (and cut your employer's health care costs).

      (Do you want to have fun? Ask your employer to show you the publications in the peer-reviewed literature to support those "suggestions.")

      Of course BusinessWeek didn't want to recommend the non-corporate ways to cut health care costs. http://www.openmedicine.ca/art...

  22. Again by Hevel-Varik · · Score: 1

    This again. You have to be Superman or Superwoman or be married to Superwoman or Superman (all bases covered!) or be a lesser hero married to another lesser hero to make enough money to support a family and Government and Industry are *worried* about gender distribution in a particular field of industry.

    Either we live in Kafka Land or the real interests aren't being disclosed. Both may be true. Or maybe the real problems are truly intractable and this what our betters come up with to keep busy.

    How about this. End public schools. Give a voucher for every child and let the parents decide where to spend it. Don't oversee anything. If parents want to send their children to donald duck academy then more power to them.Government shall accredit any 'school' on which the child is on site for what are now normal school hours. That will give you the opportunity to send your kid to math academy or whatever else you think is valuable. It would also encourage schools nobody ever thought of before. Industry could actually play a vital role (Disney cartoonist academy?) Haven't thought this out, really, but what is clear is none of the issues will be bettered without major change, and I deeply wish for once in memory to see even one major change in the direction of personal sovereignty.

    1. Re:Again by digsbo · · Score: 1

      You want personal sovereignty. Why not give the voucher to home schooling parents, which in effects subsidizes the stay-home parent?

    2. Re:Again by Hevel-Varik · · Score: 1

      fair enough, I agree with that, too. just complicates things a bit cause what's to stop a bad or extremely needy parent from pocketing the cash. I don't like tests and curricular requirements. To be fair, I haven't thought this out, I just know that I like the idea, and hate the public school system.

    3. Re:Again by Howitzer86 · · Score: 1

      The industry is playing an progressively larger roll already. Perhaps it's too early to say for sure, but I think what we may see next are other industries: construction, healthcare, agriculture, entertainment, etc, competing with each other in the educational dominance of American children from the cradle on up.

      If you are taught from preschool to 12th grade be a nurse, and your exposure to alternatives are reduced, you'll probably become a nurse. What we're seeing now is just one industry seeking to dominate education in that way. The result - if held consistent over a generation - may well be a glut of computer programmers. The outcome of that is obvious, but what may also occur is a call to attention from the other industries, who suddenly feel left behind and forced to pay more for their dwindling supply of talent.

    4. Re:Again by Hevel-Varik · · Score: 1

      The key to healthy industry involvement is parents having money to pay for education and the choice to buy whatever education they wish. Industry should have a profit motivation to attract students. Between 6 and 20 thousand are spent per kid in the public school system (http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2014/05/23/heres-how-much-each-state-spends-on-public-school-students/) I didn't read the link I'm just looking for a ball park. I'm guessing that enough money to motivate service providers to get in the game.

      It's a dream come true, I'd actually have businesses competing for my kids to be in their schools. It's practically utopic. I don't see any obvious problems save for tremendous impact that would have on public school employees because a lot of them would be fired. (And to be fair, mostly because of this it will never ever ever happen.)

      Industry should not be getting in to lower their labor costs, or at least the public should not facilitate that.

  23. Using a computer != CS Skills by ErichTheRed · · Score: 1

    I posted something like this yesterday about the San Francisco CS education mandate. Getting people familiar with computers is good, labeling it as "CS education" is disingenuous. Millenials and "digital natives" aren't CS experts because they can use their iPhones and post on Facebook, nor are they CS experts because they can write a document in Office. If those same people can actually understand how the iPhone does what it does, or have some clue about how an operating system works, then that's different. Being a proficient user of a pre-packaged, easy to use platform is not the same as understanding how that platform works. I'm sure that the CS education they're referring to will be mainly focused on the "user" side of things.

    That being said, I wonder how many true CS people will be needed in the future. There will always be a need for hardcore OS development, kernel hacking, embedded systems work and so on. I'm not so sure about the legions of corporate application developers, web coders, etc. Even if the goal of the program is to reduce salaries in the long term, and increase H-1B visas in the short term, it seems to me like the market might do that anyway, as platforms consolidate and applications become easier for non-CS people to code up.

  24. coding slaves by AndyKron · · Score: 1

    Gotta have more coding slaves to feed the assholes of America.

  25. The MIsogyny of Slashdot by scruffy · · Score: 2

    When did Slashdot turn so misogynist?

    Evidence 1: The parent of this post.

    Evidence 2: The moderators got it to a 5 rating.

  26. Yes, because there's a shortage of programmers by nikhilhs · · Score: 2

    Yes, there's a shortage of programmers. That's why Microsoft laid off 18,000 last year and will layoff another 500 this year.

    1. Re:Yes, because there's a shortage of programmers by Bengie · · Score: 2

      Ms didn't lay off 18k MS programmers, they laid off 13k Nokia designers, marketing, sales, etc from the company purchase. There was a lot of redundant positions and MS trimmed the "fat".

  27. Everybody seems to have missed the real problem. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Microsoft has now bought its own public eduction system...

    No chance for learning about Macs, Linux, or BSD/UNIX.

  28. Re:The Muh Soggy Knee of Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Slashdot isn't misogynist. It just still has a few normal people who refuse to accept SJW gospel as the absolute truth.
    Saying men and women are different isn't misogyny, just like saying cars and trucks are different doesn't mean you hate one or the other. Ask any feminist of old about the current bullshit and they will tell you the same thing.

  29. It's about control by Thundercleets · · Score: 1

    Most of the time philanthropy is a good thing, money goes to where it is needed. Since the 90's some of it is about tax payer funding through tax deductions and break granted to wealthy doners who use their philanthropy to influence and many case outright control an industry or market.

  30. Re:Everybody seems to have missed the real problem by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 1

    Thank You!

  31. Morons by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 1

    "But legislators in the WA House and Senate — apparently more swayed by the pro-HB 1813 testimony of representatives from Microsoft and Microsoft-backed TEALS and Code.org — overwhelmingly passed the bill, sending it to Governor Jay Inslee for his signature.

    Not to worry. On Wednesday, the bill was signed into law by Gov. Inslee, who was perhaps influenced by the we-need-to-pass-HB-1813 blogging of Microsoft General Counsel and Code.org Board member Brad Smith, who coincidentally is not only responsible for Microsoft's philanthropic work, but was also co-chair of Gov.-elect Inslee's transition team.

    The WA state legislative victory comes less than 24 hours after the San Francisco School Board voted to require CS instruction beginning with preschool."

    Do you get the point now. The point about more women in CS is irrelevant. It's about corporations buying our educational system and passing legislation *they* want regardless if the public needs. This is what you need to focus on not this coding in high school b.s.

  32. In Soviet Russia by nbauman · · Score: 1

    40% of chemistry PhDs were women.

    http://www.smithsonianmag.com/...

    Soviet Russia Had a Better Record of Training Women in STEM Than America Does Today
    Perhaps it's time for the United States to take a page from the Soviet book just this one time
    By Rose Eveleth
    smithsonian.com
    December 12, 2013

    Between 1962 and 1964, 40 percent of the chemistry PhD's awarded in Soviet Russia went to women. At that same time in the United States, that number was a measly five percent. In 2006, that number was still lower than the Soviets' from the '60s—just 35 percent, according to the American Institute of Physics Research Center. In 2012, still only 37 percent of chemistry PhDs in America went to women.

    Take this letter from a girl from Ukraine to Yuri Gagarin:

    I have wanted to ask you for a long time already: ‘is it possible for a simple village girl to fly to the cosmos?’ But I never decided to do it. Now that the first Soviet woman has flown into space, I finally decided to write you a letter.I know [to become a cosmonaut] one needs training and more training, one needs courage and strength of character. And although I haven’t yet trained ‘properly’, I am still confident of my strength. It seems to me that with the kind of preparation that you gave Valia Tereshkova, I would also be able to fly to the cosmos.

    1. Re:In Soviet Russia by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

      Actually, not that different in some UW departments. A lot of PhDs awarded in Biostatistics, Medical Genetics and other fields that are computationally heavy are women.

      --
      -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  33. another bad education policy from on high by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, lobbyists talked the legislature into prioritizing CS education, at the expense of more basic subjects, like reading, writing, or arithmetic (good luck getting a tax increase). A good teacher can predict this will be a problem, but hey, I'm sure Microsoft knows about k-12 education, than some nobody teachers.

    Good thing I don't live in Washington.

  34. Not Flamebait by Etherwalk · · Score: 1

    Women tend to gravitate towards meaningful projects. Women are also implicitly discriminated against by the traditional "boys only club" mentality that predominates the technology and science cultures.

    Provide meaningful projects in gender-neutral environments and women may very well gravitate towards them. So will plenty of other people of any gender.

    Why was this modded down? It's what research has shown. I know that when I did CS undergrad, the department had discovered that women were *much* more likely than men to take Computer Science for *practical reasons*, so that it could help them as they pursued careers in Chemistry or Bio or other fields. Men were much more likely to be interested in Computer Science for its own sake.

    They also found that women were *much* more likely to go on and take more computer science courses if at least one of their intro profs was a woman. I wouldn't quite call it a "boys only club" mentality because that hearkens back to the days of explicit discrimination against women rather than systemic gender biased flaws in a program which make it less accessible or interesting to women.

  35. Re:Everybody seems to have missed the real problem by mattventura · · Score: 1

    That didn't happen before, either. MS already funded a good amount of equipment purchases for K12 schools in WA (running Windows, of course). Not to mention, people want computers that just work. Every minute spent dealing with tech issues is a minute less spent on learning.

  36. Microsoft or no, it's a complete waste of time by zkiwi34 · · Score: 1

    Why? Not H1B's although that is amusing to consider how it will screw local hopefuls beyond their wildest dreams. But rather, the natural progression is to university CS and related programs. And here's the catch. They demand Calculus + Physics, and only give token (if any) consideration to what you did in CS in grade school. Not even AP and/or IB CS is all that well respected, if it is respected at all.

    Until the Universities care, it's all a vast waste of time, effort and money.

  37. Pay parity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you want pay parity for females start with professional sport.

  38. Well ... It Is Dollars And Cents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    M$ gave the WA Gov 3 Billion Dollars in CASH using increments of 1000 dollar transactions to get under the IRS Radar; The IRS radar scores amounts not time-of-flight! And, the transactions were from an "off shore Bank" in the Bahamas.

    Ha ha Gov.

    You can't hide so easily.

    Well well well, Jay Inslee! How many condoms, how much heroin and LSD can 3 billion dollars buy?

    Care ... to .... share?

    Ha ha

  39. Women, liberated? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's kinda funny but if you look at it -- women are told what they should and shouldn't do, more now than ever before.