Will This Help Them Produce Better Tech...

[bazwillrun]

or just make them feel better about themselves ?

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/01/07/intel_diversity_promise/

just another truly pathetic example of pandering...oh well

[Gromit]

Yes.
Intel and Microsoft have been white male dominated for years, and their products suck.
I expect you are against the green iniatives as well that encourage recyclable hardware and none fossil fuel power for manufacturing and storage farms.

[youngmafbog]

I think the problem lies with the announcement of big bucks.

Surely any company wishing to achieve any sort of equality can do this without that as it lends itself to accusations of positive discrimination.

As for none fossil fuel Gromit, I'm all for it providing it is not done at any cost. ie I dont want huge pretty useless wind farms blotting the landscape.

Recycling hardware is a good thing, not sure why anyone would be against that. Personally I recycled well before it became popular and I reuse/repair as much as possible. But that is because I hate waste and I am mean as ***s not because I am 'green'.

[wolf63]

It is actually quite insulting to any black females in the industry. They would never know if they got the job because they were the best candidate or if it was just because they were black and female.

[youngmafbog]

I wonder if they will also have a drive to recruit from the most discriminated group in eomployment: MAFBOGS. Middle Aged fat Balding Old Gits.

[bazwillrun]

Gromit showing his usaul lack of intelligence...

explain how recruiting more blacks will improve the quality of intel and MS products ?

[Gromit]

Baz,
Because the best engineers and the best thinkers are not all white men.

Microsoft should recruit the best people from anywhere in the world. If there is a genius or two in India, they should employ them. If some happen to be women, then that does not matter. The aim should be to get the best people there are out there. If you limit yourself to just employing a subset that are Male and White, then you are harming your own company. If another company picks up the best people instead, then you are giving your competitors an advantage.

Of course this argument only works if you are prepared to accept white males are not the only people with any talent.

[Gromit]

The headline to the article is very misleading.

I tel are not paying womemn big bucks. They are paying the managers who re ruit them big bucks. And as we know, they are the white males.

// Intel will tie executives' pay to their ability to bring more women and minorities into its workforce, CEO Brian Krzanich said in his CES keynote on Tuesday //

[Gromit]

Fortune magazine ranked tech companies on diversity. The company that by far makes the most money in Tech, are 2nd in the diversity table.

// To calculate how the 14 tech companies fared overall, Fortune assigned points based on how they ranked in five categories: Overall gender diversity, overall ethnic diversity, gender diversity of the leadership team, ethnic diversity of the leadership team and gender diversity among technical workers. Companies that failed to report data in a particular category were given last place points for that category. Here’s how they stacked up, at least by Fortune’s measure:

1. LinkedIn
2. Apple
3. eBay
4. Indiegogo & Yahoo (tied)
6. Pinterest
7. Pandora
8. Facebook
9. Intel & Google (tied)
11. Twitter
12. Cisco
13. Hewlett-Packard
14. Microsoft

[ludwig]

// The aim should be to get the best people there are out there. //

What if it turns out these all happen to be white males? It probably won't, but it's a hypothetical question. If it did, should they still aim for diversity?

[Gromit]

Ludwig,
If we were to assume the best people are the white males, then the company with all white males would be the one that was the most successful and profitable. That company could then argue that they were happy with their discriminatory recruitment policy because it makes them the best, and if they had the best profits then who could refute that.

Back in the real world away from hypothetical questions, the most successful companies are the ones who are most diverse. Intel and Microsoft are making noises about changing their company culture because they are not going through a rough patch.

[Gromit]

Are going through a rough patch

[ludwig]

So you'd agree with me that they should recruit the best candidates then, irrespective of race, creed or colour. That's all I wanted to clarify.

[naomi24]

How patronising!

Gromit, //….That company could then argue that they were happy with their discriminatory recruitment policy….//

If the white males the company recruited were the best, how is that discriminatory?

[237SJ]

Gromit - "Microsoft should employ the best people from anywhere in the world. If there is a genius or two in India, they should employ them" I`m assuming that you wouldn`t complain if you were made redundant because your job had been taken by someone from India or elsewhere who is prepared to work for a fraction of your salary.

[Gromit]

Microsoft is a global company whose headquarters are in the United States. It sells worldwide with sales in very different markets. It is wrong to think Microsoft should just employ Americans. Software, which is chiefly Microsoft's product is written in global languages, not local ones like English. You can live anywhere in the world, in a not English native speaking country, and write great software. And if you are not Ametican, it should not matter, Microsoft should be interested in yor talents.

[Gromit]

Naomi,
Thank you for the selective reading of my post. You obviously missed the bit where I said...
// and if they had the best profits then who could refute that. //

The point is, the companies with bad diversity in their workforce are the ones not performing as well as the companies that do.
The proposed changes are not driven by pandering, they are driven by Microsoft shareholders who want the company to improve.

[naomi24]

Gromit, I copied the bit of your post that was relevant to my question, the word ‘discriminatory’ being the central issue. I’ll copy the whole if you think it will help you answer it.

//If we were to assume the best people are the white males, then the company with all white males would be the one that was the most successful and profitable. That company could then argue that they were happy with their discriminatory recruitment policy because it makes them the best, and if they had the best profits then who could refute that.//

… and I’ll ask again ….If the white males the company recruited were the best, how is that discriminatory?

[Gromit]

In this hypothetical universe where all the white men are super intelligent and all the women and blacks are dumb asses, then it wouldn't be discriminatory to employ just white men.
So I agree with you Naomi, Women and blacks just hold tech companies back in the hypothetical universe.

Meanwhile, back in the real world...

[naomi24]

Gromit, I didn't say that and neither did I imply it. I asked you - twice - why you think choosing the best people for the job is discriminatory. I think it's you who needs to acknowledge the real world.

[Gromit]

I have already said, if results and profits proved (in this hypothetical scenario) that the white male company were the best, who could refute it.

My last posting on this tonight.