Slashdot Mirror
Google Hosts Special Demo Day For Female Entrepreneurs (thenewstack.io)
An anonymous reader writes: Wednesday Google hosted a special edition of their annual "Demo Day" event featuring 11 early-stage startup companies founded by women from eight different countries. More than 450 women from 40 different counties applied for a spot, and the winner of the competition was Bridgit, a fast-growing Canadian company which provides a mobile communications platform for construction teams. Online voters also awarded the "Game Changer" title to KiChing, a startup that's actively addressing Mexico's unique e-commerce challenges. But all of the startups at Wednesday's event were already actively raising series-A funding, and "We aim to help connect them to mentors, access to capital, and shine a spotlight on their efforts," said Mary Grove, the director of Google for Entrepreneurs, addressing the Demo Day audience in San Francisco.
Missing important details like how many sandwiches did they make?
Slow news day.
Well at least you held off for a few days this time.
It's always been clear why women aren't competitive with men at the 100-meter dash, but it's not clear why women aren't competitive with men at professional poker.
Not trying to flame - not being a Jerk, just pointing out a disconnect at Google HQ.
What if one of those Female Entrepreneurs sold confederate merchandise in her "Bring Back the Dukes of Hazard" store?
Well then obviously the Patriarchy made her do it.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
There's a fellow at work who keeps going on and on about how great the Rust programming language is. He keeps raving about how its community is totally diverse, how it has a code of conduct, how there's a team that goes after people who don't follow the code of conduct, and how it's the most progressive programming language community he has ever been a part of. Yet when I go look at the contributors to Rust, I see one male after another. Why are so many Rust contributors men? If the project is so inclusive, tolerant, and open to everyone then why aren't there more women contributing to Rust?
So now that women have their own safe space we can expect some amazing innovation to follow. But if we don't, I wonder what the next excuse will be?
How long have you been here?
The general consensus on Slashdot is that:
1. Men have no advantage over women; quite the opposite, a significant set of disadvantages;
2. Women are under-represented in higher-earning professions because "they just don't feel like it"
3. Anything aimed at women only is end-of-the-word discrimination.
I can see that if there are cultural or societal issues that make women less likely to be entrepreneurial, then perhaps an event of this nature can send a message that women do indeed participate and compete in such endeavors. That's all well and good and I have no problem with it. Maybe it will encourage more women to cast aside incorrect stereotypes.
But as others have said, let's never send a message that women aren't as good and need extra help to be successful. That's horribly condescending, unfair, and just plain untrue.
tbh I think you're trying to flame.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
4chan is infested with SJWs now. I would say /. is still significantly more mature than that wretched hive of scum and villainy.
Go tell a women she has to pull a few all-nighter because the product need to be shipped Sunday evening...
I know several female devs.
They've been just as likely to stay late or come in on weekends as anyone else.
Now they didn't have kids so maybe that would change if they get children, but for the childless twenty-somethings, they're just as dedicated as the guys.
I stole this Sig
perhaps males have a ridiculous number of advantages because at some point in the past, women had all the advantages and males were treated as charity cases and given preferential treatment which they exploited to revolt.
sexism is sexism. put lipstick on the pig all you want... you're an ignorant hypocrite.
I can't tell if you're trolling or an explorer from an alternate dimension.
I stole this Sig
What advantage? Are males somehow better?
All these 'helping hands' given to women make us look weak and pathetic. As a woman, I don't like that.
Try to make me submit, you'll face the cold muzzle of a rifle pointed at you.
remember that men are defective women...
How long have you been here?
The general consensus on Slashdot is that:
1. Men have no advantage over women; quite the opposite, a significant set of disadvantages;
2. Women are under-represented in higher-earning professions because "they just don't feel like it"
3. Anything aimed at women only is end-of-the-word discrimination.
I'm trying to shift that consensus.
Mostly when I read a thread on /. I see similar opinions to those I see in the industry as a whole.
But whenever an article about feminism comes up the comment threads become absolutely toxic. I normally brag to people about the high quality of comments on /., but I don't want any association with the views I see expressed in threads like these.
These threads aren't going to get any better until those those of us who disagree with this consensus speak up and make our case.
I stole this Sig
Exceptions that prove the rule.
If everyone I know is an exception then it's not a very useful rule.
I stole this Sig
"Tech entrepreneurs" of whatever gender are mostly just rich/connected people with an idea for an app and either are personal friends with or hire someone to actually make the beast.
90% of "tech startups" are "apps" of some time or have them as a major part of what they do.
It was different back in the day.
In the US, typically the person with the money wanted to be the "investor" and the "entrepreneur" was the same as the inventor or coder.
Old-school rich people showed off by being able to choose the right person to invest in, nowadays the new-school rich show off by *being* the person at the top of the investment, at least publicly.
Thank you Dave Raggett
this has nothing to do with libertarianism...
Yeah but /. has significantly less interesting discussion than 4chan. And oddly enough 4chan is (or was) greater referenced.
One of the larger problems here is even the act of questioning the validity of women only event is seen as misogyny. 4chan bears no such illusion and has unbridled misogyny and questioning.
That aiming a critical eye at women preferencing events gets tag with misogyny here is nothing more than an attempt at censorship; that people could even think that separate class doesn't support greater equality.
We should praise the ones who don't want to stay late. They hurt themselves, and they hurt the rest of us by normalising it to the point where it's expected if you want to get ahead.
I worked at a place that discouraged it, and always made people who worked late for exceptional reasons take the time off later. As such people would set realistic deadlines and not pressure others to work late to make them look good.
Subordinates having too much overtime was taken as a sign of poor management.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Being barely 1/3rd of college graduates is an advantage? Having virtually no special programs, aid, funding, or mentorship available to you is an advantage? Being utterly excluded from virtually the entire social safety net in case you go broke trying is an advantage?
A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
Mark it on the calender we agree about something. Unfortunately a lot of people are forced into overtime due to the lack of living wages.
A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
We should praise the ones who don't want to stay late. They hurt themselves, and they hurt the rest of us by normalising it to the point where it's expected if you want to get ahead.
I worked at a place that discouraged it, and always made people who worked late for exceptional reasons take the time off later. As such people would set realistic deadlines and not pressure others to work late to make them look good.
Subordinates having too much overtime was taken as a sign of poor management.
I agree though our place is really good about that.
Previously we were hourly so to the extent people did OT they were generally driving it themselves. Now we're on salary but management is very good about encouraging a 40hr week. If you work 42 your manager starts asking why you aren't going home earlier.
It's still a pain if it happens since you do plan your life around a regular workday and weekends off, but it's not a terribly common occurrence.
I stole this Sig
The majority of Slashdotters are, to put it simply, against discrimination. If there was discrimination against women as blatant as the discrimination against men in this story, I assure you, it would be condemned just as strongly.
Essentially, there are three groups, with different beliefs:
A: Discrimination against women is more acceptable than discrimination against men.
B: Discrimination against men and women are equally unacceptable.
C: Discrimination against men is more acceptable than discrimination against women.
Groups A and C are sexist. The majority of Slashdotters are in group B. You, and a substantial minority, are in group C. No one is in group A.
For the amount money I'm getting paid, I don't see the problem of doing it on an exceptional basis.
More special privileges for women -- as if they didn't have enough already -- and more discrimination against men. I'm getting really, really tired of this, especially when I see my son excluded from one educational opportunity after another solely because of his sex.
How many of those are formed in gender studies instead of some STEM area?
I bet on none, which is why they're actually "white CIS males in disguise and don't actually count" for the PC group of evil.
To your chess example, two words: Judit Polgar.
Was the only woman to ever beat Kasparov.
At her peak, was the #8 chess player in the world.
And...mostly refused to play women-only tournaments.
Some people don't believe in fairies. I don't believe in The Patriarchy.
I don't think men and women are ever meant to see eye to eye. Each sex finds the other intoxicating and infuriating in equal amount. However I do think this perpetual turbulence must help us thrive as a species somehow.
Or maybe we're just the Gods' reality show, and the producers made us this way to "stir up some trouble", and make it more interesting. :-)
Males have a ridiculous number of advantages when it comes to becoming entrepreneurs, having the occasional female-specific event to try and correct some of the imbalance does not count as discrimination.
"Advantages"? Like what?
"Correct"? Why is there a need to "correct"?
> having the occasional female-specific event to try and correct some of the imbalance does not count as discrimination.
You can't undefine the word. You can make a [good - ed.] argument that it's not an injustice, but denying the facts does nobody any favors.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
To your chess example, two words: Judit Polgar.
I remember reading an interview with her in some chess magazine. My brother was a very keen chess player and rather good (obviously not *that* good). I wasn't but I went to quite a number of tournaments (yeah! slogging it out on the bottom board of the minor---someone's gotta do it), but often had uh... a rather long wait between games.
Anyway, in answer to one question she quipped that she'd never beaten a well man, or words to that effect. IOW every win (well probably not every, but a very significant number) came with excuses for the opponent's loss.
Anyway, IME, chess tournaments are also full of some deeply strange people. Not necessarily bad, but not exactly on the "normally socalised" end of things.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Amen, +5. I know several devs who are women and a higher percentage of them won't put up with management bullshit than the male devs I know (many of whom are human floormats). The very best thing male devs can do for the culture is to aspire to be as socially courageous and self-respecting as the women. One reason female devs are disrespected is because male devs create an environment for all devs to be disrespected.
Of course, when my plans for groups include "be more courageous" usually I'm disappointed in the outcomes.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
having the occasional female-specific event to try and correct some of the imbalance does not count as discrimination.
actually, it is discrimination by definition.
Discrimination is treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing is perceived to belong to rather than on individual merit.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
Right, men really struggle to compete with all those women being forced into jobs they don't want. Men have to work twice as hard, and if they can't they complain that it's because women made overtime a dirty word or got them fired for doing guy stuff that other guys wouldn't mind, like sending dick pics.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Jews have a ridiculous number of advantages when it comes to being entrepreneurs, having the occasional Aryan-specific event to try and correct some of the imbalance does not count as discrimination.
(I don't know for sure, but I would bet cash money that there were Aryan-only business networking events. I *do* know that there were Aryan-only academic programs.)
For any discussion worth reading I go to "The Right Stuff.biz".
I think anyone who reaches the top of their field, no matter what field, is deeply strange and on some level has problems relating to the rest of us mortals. Because in order to achieve that level of focus on that one thing, one must be able to block other things out. It probably acts to the detriment of other skills that everyone else needs to get along with the rest of the planet, who weren't born with natural talents and need to compensate somehow.
Polgar, as I understand it, is a chess prodigy, who could beat experts when she was a child, with her back turned to the board no less. Her two sisters are ranked highly in the chess world as well, though more among women. That having been said, her parents sought out to prove the three girls could be chess masters by starting them training at an early age. If you're not a completely maladjusted weirdo by virtue of the fact that your parents openly stated that they made you into an experiment in subject mastery, you're doing all right.
But you don't get to be the #8 player in the world by being mediocre. Maybe I don't know enough about chess that I don't know how much of her modestly comes across as false, but there's only so much social engineering and opponent wrangling that you can do before the cracks in your talent show. But then again, we could discuss Ronda Rousey as well...
Some people don't believe in fairies. I don't believe in The Patriarchy.
A nerd usually has the physical power of a girl, does not get any of the advantages of being an alpha man, has all the societal disadvantages of being a man, and none of the societal advantages of being a woman. Most of them have been physically and mentally bullied in ways that would be totally unacceptable if the victim had been a girl.
So, when they hear from stupid rich girls that they are somehow oppressed in this society, and that as compensation they should get lots of free benefits just for their sex, and that men should be punished and discriminated in jobs just for being men, they can get very angry.
Men are expected to work hard to get money for them and their wives, even if their wife does not work. Yet not a single woman, even the most feminist one, will ever support a man who does not work. I've seen plenty of studies and they all show total opposition to the idea. In most countries, after a divorce is the man the one that is forced to pay a monthly salary to his ex-wife or go to jail, even if the ex-wife has a job and the man does not (which was in every case the reason behind the divorce, always initiated by the woman).
There is a forth option:
D: Things that help women gain equality while not directly harming men are an acceptable way to correct the existing imbalance.
So, in this case, men are not actually being hurt in any way*, and the goal is to correct the imbalance in tech, and thus it is okay. D is the mainstream view held by the majority of people, which is why events like this are legal and rarely challenged.
* I'm looking forward to the tortured logic that tires to claim it is though.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
No you misunderstand. The minors are just as full as deeply strange people as the major and open.
I have never met her and I've no idea if she's weird, but I played plenty of strange, not very good chess players at tournaments. Hell I've been one of the really weird people at chess tournaments.
I'm not sure what you mean by false modesty. Perhaps you're referring to something I've not read.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
So, in this case, men are not actually being hurt in any way....I'm looking forward to the tortured logic that tires to claim it is though.
No tortured logic required, just a reversal of roles. Suppose the event had been organized such that women were excluded? This would be regarded by almost everyone to be sexist discrimination that denied women a fair opportunity to demonstrate their talents to Google and thus it harms them. If this is true for women if then, by symmetry it applies to men when they are excluded. To argue otherwise would be to claim the sexism does not harm those it is biased against.
There may be a more subtle bias elsewhere which harms women but surely the society we want to strive for is where nobody's chances of success are harmed by their gender not one where we strive to harm everyone equally? The solution to sexism is to identify it and fix it not to be equally sexist in reverse. As the old saying goes "two wrongs do not make a right".
These threads aren't going to get any better until those those of us who disagree with this consensus speak up and make our case.
What are your thoughts about female discouragement of other females?
My wife was an example of of what a lot of women say is the goal. Well paid, well respected, no one's fool.
Oh - hold on. Many of the other women hated her. Not for her personality, which is admittedly alpha, but for her success. The backstabbing and occasional sabotage by jealous females was something that didn't go over too well.
The men? Despite the meme of men being the source of all trouble, they respect and with one exception really like her. They certainly listen to her when she hands out the orders. And this is in an industry with a lot of "traditional" type guys.
The same situation exists with the female engineers and scientists I worked with. Many ended up associating with only men at work because we would accept them. In the end, is it even wrong to lay all of the blame for gender issues at the feet of men?
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Maybe I misread what you originally wrote, but what you wrote reads as though she may have some sort of false modesty about her (your words: "came with excuses for the opponent's loss").
For a player of her caliber, that's the very definition of false modesty.
Some people don't believe in fairies. I don't believe in The Patriarchy.
For a player of her caliber, that's the very definition of false modesty.
I think you're misinterpreting. I don't remember the precise words (it was decades ago), but the meaning was quite clear in that almost every man she beat would come up with some excuse about not being entirely well or on form etc etc.
That's not false modesty, it's an observation about the top players not wanting to admit they got beaten fair and square by a girl.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Even Google hosts! The only way, which does not only block ads, but malware and government spying!
A: Discrimination against women is more acceptable than discrimination against men.
B: Discrimination against men and women are equally unacceptable.
C: Discrimination against men is more acceptable than discrimination against women.
Sure, few publicly state that they are members of A. However, the status quo is A. Therefore if you are satisfied with the status quo, then you are a member of A.
KiChing, a startup that's actively addressing Mexico's unique e-commerce challenges
Really? They named a company intended for Mexican markets something that basically translates into KiFuc?!
Is the competition really so tough, that you're happy just to get to the bottom rung? Does it actually affect anyone but the lowest performers? (Yes, yes, slashdot'll scream "it's not meritocracy!" here.)
The problem here is that by disregarding the value of meritocracy completely destroys your own argument.
If we shouldn't care about meritocracy then why should we care if women make it into STEM fields at all in the first place?
political: of, relating to, or involving the state or its government -- not the kindest way to describe someone but not inherently a bad thing.
correctness: the quality of conforming to fact or truth; free from error; accurate -- not at all a bad thing.
politically correct(PC): polite; respectful; considerate of the feelings or sensibilities of others -- terribly bad, evil, oppressive
I'll leave 'social justice' as an exercise for the readers.
tl;dr "Youse is moydering da King's English." Curly Howard
Fifty years of Yippie! 1968-2018
perhaps males have a ridiculous number of advantages because at some point in the past, women had all the advantages and males were treated as charity cases and given preferential treatment which they exploited to revolt.
sexism is sexism. put lipstick on the pig all you want... you're an ignorant hypocrite.
I can't tell if you're trolling or an explorer from an alternate dimension.
I love how you got modded troll yourself for this.
Slashdot itself appears to be inhabited by mods from an alternate dimension.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
Males have a ridiculous number of advantages when it comes to becoming entrepreneurs, having the occasional female-specific event to try and correct some of the imbalance does not count as discrimination.
"Advantages"? Like what?
"Correct"? Why is there a need to "correct"?
"Men don't have any advantages, and if they do they don't need to be corrected because men are superior".
Got it.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
Needing to stay later or work weekends just means stuff is being done incorrectly. The worst code is created after hours.
There's also the Slashdot idea that we live in a perfect society where there is no sex discrimination going on, which means that all (not just some) differences are due to personal inclination. I've also seen the claim that lack of legal obstacles means there's no discrimination (and those people should recognize that Google is legally free to do as it likes in this area). I don't believe those, and I'm for measures that will at least attempt to correct things. As far as I'm concerned, we do not live in a perfect society, and that gathering information on how to make it better is a Good Thing.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Being utterly excluded from virtually the entire social safety net in case you go broke trying is an advantage?
After 12 years as a freelancer, I can say with confidence: In America there IS NO safety net. Long-term dependency programs for the permanent underclass? Sure! Help for a productive person who has fallen on temporary hard times? Nada, zip, zilch, none.
Claiming something is wrong just because it includes discriminating behavior is not a valid argument by itself, as it is quite intellectually dishonest. Unless prejudice against men is found (aka, they aren't being included because they are deemed inferior)...
I disagree. Discrimination based on gender, unless our different biology is relevant, is wrong because it automatically implies prejudice. Look up the definition: prejudice is "an unfair and unreasonable opinion or feeling, especially when formed without enough thought or knowledge". Hence this example is prejudicial against men since they are being rejected out of hand without and knowledge of who they are based solely on the unreasonable criteria that they are men.
I never said that all discrimination is bad, clearly we should discriminate based on ability, but I will claim that discrimination based on gender, race, religion etc. is wrong unless that gender, race etc. is directly relevant e.g. women do not need prostate exams. This is because such discrimination automatically implies inappropriate prejudice either for or against some group. Indeed I would claim that it is you who is being intellectually dishonest because you are trying to use sophistry, such as re-defining the meaning of prejudice, to escape the real issue which is simply whether discrimination based purely on gender can every be justified.