The tech industry has long vaunted it's self as a haven for the long-oppressed, fringe members of society. To many, it is assumed to be the perfect place to go for those with ability. As long as you can code just as well as everyone else, you are welcome. But, is this really the case. Recently, there have been a variety of news articles challenging this fact; they suggest that the tech industry does not provide a level playing field and that this hurts certain groups in particular, women and the economically disadvantaged.
Despite these points, I would argue that the prevailing ethos of the computing industry is that of a meritocracy. The industry, at least the idea of the industry, is to find the best, most capable, people, regardless of gender or social standing, and put them into the roles that best make use of their skill sets. There is no place in the industry for those the cannot fulfill these roles. But, this ethos of the industry does not translate well into practice, not for the fault of the tech companies themselves, but due to our society at large.
Recently, I listened to an upwards of thirty minute NPR interview with Lazlo Bock, Vice-president of Google's People Operations (Human Resources). In the interview, Lazlo discussed at length Google's attempts to discover those that have ability that is not traditionally found in Universities. Google strives to wring out every capable person from the folds of society. Because of this, they have adopted a variety of non-traditional hiring strategies to help correct the non-level initial playing field faced by many in entering the tech industry. Is it Google's fault that some are exposed to a better technical education than others? No, but it is their responsibility to take this into account during their hiring process. At the end of the day, there isn't reason for tech companies to abandon their meritocratic structure. But, it is, I think, in their best interest and their responsibility to work towards generating equal opportunity for everyone.
A few of the articles I have read discussed the problem with the lack of women at major tech companies and the lack of involvement they have in the industry. This isn't an industry problem, however, it is a societal problem. To many women are discouraged from taking on tech roles even before they have the chance to enter the industry. Looking at our higher-education systems in the US, the STEM fields are disproportionately made up of males. There is a lingering ethos in America that technical fields are more "suited" to men and that women should stick with less applied fields (writing, art, etc). I think that, if we want to fix this, there must be a large grassroots effort across the country to educate children, and their parents. that the engineering disciplines are not reserved for men. Because, in the end, there is so much left on the table when a segment of approximately 50% of the population is discouraged from taking up a discipline.
Monday, August 29, 2016
Wednesday, August 24, 2016
Post 2: On the Parable of Talents
Prompt: What is your interpretation of the Parable of the Talents? How does it apply to your life and your computing skills and talents?
The key to my understanding of the parable of talents is in the master's choice of distributing his wealth to his servants "according to [their] ability" (Matthew 25:14). The master gave his most gifted servant five talents, his middle servant two talents, and his least able servant only a single talent. As the parable continues, the first two servants who received five and two talents, respectively, make a return on the investment and are praised by the master. However, the final servant gives back only the investment to his master and is subsequently expelled from his master's service. Why was this servant expelled? It technically did not do the master any harm for the servant to only pay back what was invested in him. Why was the master, in this case, so angry? And, the answer to this, is that the master recognized the distinct abilities of his servants. He did not hoard his money, keeping it with him as he traveled. He dispersed it, although unequally, among his servants because he believed in them. He gave them no instructions. The first two servants performed as expected, and were praised. But, the final servant put forth no effort because he was afraid of the master, and of failing.
What this is saying is that although not everyone is equal, everyone has ability. The worst thing one can do is squander that ability, being content to stagnate and not seek a return on our investments. This behavior is primarily caused by one of two things: fear or sloth. One that does not seek constant improvement is either afraid of finding out the limit of their abilities or just too lazy to make an attempt. This is a much greater sin than just trying and failing. I am sure that if the third servant came to the master and, after trying to seek a return on that one talent investment, admitted that he was not able to make a return (or even lost money) the master would not have been angry, or at least not expelled the servant. But, the servant was paralyzed by his own fear.
This parable is especially relevant to myself as a college student. I recognize that I am not the strongest programmer at Notre Dame. I am not the five talent servant. But, that does not stop me from seeking a return on the investment I have made in this University and in the investment that this University has made in me. I do not want to be afraid of failing, of seeking new experiences just because I am afraid of failing. I think the fear of failing is the biggest issue facing Notre Dame students. Because, let's face it, before coming to Notre Dame, many of us had never failed in anything. While impressive, the actual experience of failing is invaluable to learning about yourself and your abilities.
The key to my understanding of the parable of talents is in the master's choice of distributing his wealth to his servants "according to [their] ability" (Matthew 25:14). The master gave his most gifted servant five talents, his middle servant two talents, and his least able servant only a single talent. As the parable continues, the first two servants who received five and two talents, respectively, make a return on the investment and are praised by the master. However, the final servant gives back only the investment to his master and is subsequently expelled from his master's service. Why was this servant expelled? It technically did not do the master any harm for the servant to only pay back what was invested in him. Why was the master, in this case, so angry? And, the answer to this, is that the master recognized the distinct abilities of his servants. He did not hoard his money, keeping it with him as he traveled. He dispersed it, although unequally, among his servants because he believed in them. He gave them no instructions. The first two servants performed as expected, and were praised. But, the final servant put forth no effort because he was afraid of the master, and of failing.
What this is saying is that although not everyone is equal, everyone has ability. The worst thing one can do is squander that ability, being content to stagnate and not seek a return on our investments. This behavior is primarily caused by one of two things: fear or sloth. One that does not seek constant improvement is either afraid of finding out the limit of their abilities or just too lazy to make an attempt. This is a much greater sin than just trying and failing. I am sure that if the third servant came to the master and, after trying to seek a return on that one talent investment, admitted that he was not able to make a return (or even lost money) the master would not have been angry, or at least not expelled the servant. But, the servant was paralyzed by his own fear.
This parable is especially relevant to myself as a college student. I recognize that I am not the strongest programmer at Notre Dame. I am not the five talent servant. But, that does not stop me from seeking a return on the investment I have made in this University and in the investment that this University has made in me. I do not want to be afraid of failing, of seeking new experiences just because I am afraid of failing. I think the fear of failing is the biggest issue facing Notre Dame students. Because, let's face it, before coming to Notre Dame, many of us had never failed in anything. While impressive, the actual experience of failing is invaluable to learning about yourself and your abilities.
Introduction
Hello everyone,
My name is Mitch Troy and I am a Senior at the University of Notre Dame. I am currently pursuing a Bachelor's Degree in Computer Science with a minor in Engineering Corporate Practice. I am not sure exactly what I want to do with my computer science degree once I graduate, but am weighing the possibility of getting my MBA. Outside of programming, I am very active in Notre Dame's Music community, playing in the saxophone in the marching band and various other ensembles.
In this class, I hope to learn more about how to respond to the various moral problems we will face in the workforce and how to approach them. I know that there is often never a completely correct solution to these problems (eg. is it morally wrong to write software that benefits our military capabilities) but it is always beneficial to at least be aware of these issues.
The issue that I am currently most interested in is data security. With so much data being collected from us every day both with and without our knowledge, I'd like to think more deeply about the tough choices those who parse and analyze that data face.
My name is Mitch Troy and I am a Senior at the University of Notre Dame. I am currently pursuing a Bachelor's Degree in Computer Science with a minor in Engineering Corporate Practice. I am not sure exactly what I want to do with my computer science degree once I graduate, but am weighing the possibility of getting my MBA. Outside of programming, I am very active in Notre Dame's Music community, playing in the saxophone in the marching band and various other ensembles.
In this class, I hope to learn more about how to respond to the various moral problems we will face in the workforce and how to approach them. I know that there is often never a completely correct solution to these problems (eg. is it morally wrong to write software that benefits our military capabilities) but it is always beneficial to at least be aware of these issues.
The issue that I am currently most interested in is data security. With so much data being collected from us every day both with and without our knowledge, I'd like to think more deeply about the tough choices those who parse and analyze that data face.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)