> you'd probably be better off hiring 50 year old straight white men who vote Republican and have been at it since the days of Netscape.
Yeah, but look at where Netscape is now. Why would I trust them?
I'm serious—I've worked for a lot of 50-year-old straight white men who wouldn't vote for anyone left of Kerry and have a resume of mediocre but famous companies, and they're genuinely not good at their jobs. Unless their job is making more mediocre but famous companies, of course, which I'm starting to suspect.
> Massive market inefficiencies exist in hiring. Zigging where your competitors zag is likely to pay off more than following the trend.
I think you're overestimating how many companies are genuinely putting effort into hiring women. Are you getting your data from news articles instead of walking around companies and looking at who's actually employed? The people that are zigging are those who are honest about trying to hire women / minorities instead of just looking for media attention.
Yeah, but look at where Netscape is now. Why would I trust them?
I'm serious—I've worked for a lot of 50-year-old straight white men who wouldn't vote for anyone left of Kerry and have a resume of mediocre but famous companies, and they're genuinely not good at their jobs. Unless their job is making more mediocre but famous companies, of course, which I'm starting to suspect.
> Massive market inefficiencies exist in hiring. Zigging where your competitors zag is likely to pay off more than following the trend.
I think you're overestimating how many companies are genuinely putting effort into hiring women. Are you getting your data from news articles instead of walking around companies and looking at who's actually employed? The people that are zigging are those who are honest about trying to hire women / minorities instead of just looking for media attention.