/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.10308764]

How do we make CS more approachable for women with skills in natural sciences? Universities have not have not tackled this problem in any effective way, even if they would very much profit from having a female perspective on ever growing digital world.

[Anonymous No.10308767]

>>10308764
>even if they would very much profit from having a female perspective
it is literally the most approachable subject thats ever existed
women just arent interested

[Anonymous No.10308774]

>>10308767
You're probably misogynist or gay, maybe both, but that doesn't take away the fat that CS should reinvent itself. Yes, it's appealing for anime faggots, trannies and loners, but we need to change that, but how?

[Anonymous No.10308776]

We don't. This shit is why it takes two years in a typical course to just go over the basics of Java and fundamental algorithms and whatever crap 'business in the modern world' subjects they throw in. If girls want a more approachable degree then let them do those Business Tech courses they have and throw in a bunch of feminist theory to make them feel important.

[Anonymous No.10308780]

>>10308764
Article:
>https://www.google.com/amp/www.thejournal.ie/gender-equality-countries-stem-girls-3848156-Feb2018/%3famp=1
Title:
>'A gender equality paradox': Countries with more gender equality have fewer female STEM grads
You can't force it. If you fix nurture, nature is over-expressed. That's evolutionary psychology for you.

Also, that article is bullshit, Scandinavian countries have great welfare support. Norway literally gives away tuition.

[Anonymous No.10308788]

>>10308776
It needs to be made more attractive, maybe sexy, but there are no role models for our young prospects. WHY have tech people chosen toxic and hateful people like Linus as their Overlords? Do they not understand that it's completely backwards approach to the whole problem? Just asking.

[Anonymous No.10308792]

>>10308788
Because he's extremely talented? You know, "meritocracy", or is that sexist now?

[Anonymous No.10308794]

>>10308764

[Anonymous No.10308800]

>>10308792
You're the type who loves Steve Jobs. Not the way we should go.

[Anonymous No.10308805]

>>10308800
Whoa, if that's your argument you can fuck off.
Anything a little more compelling, or pragmatic? See, the great thing about ideals is that, as per Hegelian dialectic, you need to compromise to make headway.

[Anonymous No.10308808]

>>10308764
>approachable
how can you be this retarded and still type
are you a woman

[Anonymous No.10308809]

>>10308800
>>10308805
Also, I didn't like Steve. He wasn't even a programmer, let alone an actual computer scientist.

[Anonymous No.10308816]

>>10308809
So you're completely OK with demeaning assholes as long as they can write software? I think we're onto something here.

[Anonymous No.10308817]

>>10308764
>a fucking carousel

This has to be a b8 thread. Noone in the field would link a carousel with CS.

[Anonymous No.10308819]

>>10308816
Are you even reading what I'm writing? Where exactly did I say that?
Although, if they can do their job and remain professional when required, why should I care about their ideals?

[Anonymous No.10308830]

>>10308774
>Not approachable
>Every codemonkey monkey job can be done by googling answers until your code works
>Ask a question on stack exchange and get a million answers because the field is oversaturated with experts
>Millions of YouTube videos of coding and tutorials
>Big companies falling over themselves to hire women devs
How muchore accessible can it get?

[Anonymous No.10308831]

>>10308819
>if they can shut up and do as I say why should I care what they think?
you are either retarded or a troll
no one hired to be smart would ever be blase about people
not caring is stupid
you should be more worried, but you just think this is some videogame and everyone can just switch on and off just for you
who but a woman would be this retarded and insane

[Anonymous No.10308832]

>>10308819
You're the one not reading your own posts. No doubt they can do their job, but the childish tantrums being professional? Really? Seriously mate, you need to re-evaluate your views on this problem we have at hands. I'm not gonna say 'part of the problem', because that goes nowhere, but seriously, think about it.

[Anonymous No.10308883]

Thank god all you men know how to work together otherwise this would all be a hideous joke justifying your existence.

[Anonymous No.10309025]

>>10308764
The female perspective is they don't want to do it.

[Anonymous No.10309033]

>>10308764
Offer an incentive like lower tuition or a headstart in grades. Maybe eliminate the harder classes.

[Anonymous No.10309043]

>>10309025
Bigot

[Anonymous No.10309102]

>>10308832
>b8
For what reason does there need to be more women in any field? If anything, there should be less. Women are a distraction in the work environment. Harsh language and bluntness are the signs of a good team, quality control should respect no one's feelings. If it does instead of working objectively and honestly, people die.
QA never suffers from harshness. It helps to sort out people with low attention to detail and who make little effort. Is it better that women be accommodated, or that high-quality products are made?
I know you're here cause /sci/ is easily trolled, but I'd like an honest answer.

[Anonymous No.10309149]

>>10308764
There's a movement to get more women into CS, but there are no movements to get women into driving garbage trucks or doing construction work, and there are no movements to get more men become hairdressers, for example. Really makes you think!

There's a simple reason for this. Big tech companies want the wages down. This is also the reason why they shill for (1) programming as school subject (here in Europe), and (2) H1B visas (in USA).

I don't really have anything against this, but I'd want to see people be more honest about it.

[Anonymous No.10309350]

>>10308764
Everybody getting a college degree should have to learn some programming.
It's not that hard. Anybody that does shit in Excel pretty much "understands" the basics of programming.
>female perspective
>it's too complicated
>let the men do it
Also
>female perspective
>see the term "natural sciences"
>NATURAL
>I wanna be in touch with nature and be outside and travel

[Anonymous No.10309399]

>>10308764
>>10308774
Yawn. Bait

[Anonymous No.10309403]

To all the “smart” people of /sci/ responding to this post

[Anonymous No.10310501]

>>10308764

Its impossible to make CS more approachable to women because CS requires a logical brain, something that women have a hard time possessing. This is why women are better suited for social work.

[Anonymous No.10310652]

>>10310501

[Anonymous No.10310762]

Lots of men & women abandon/don't see the appeal of CS : good. If it's not your thing, it's not your thing. We shouldn't lower the bar, they should be better! We don't want more bugs in our softwares/websites, we want professionnals who get the job done! Hiring some kind of people for anything but their SKILL won't solve our problems.

[Anonymous No.10310785]

>>10308764
How do we make plumbing/electrician/HVAC/bricklaying more approachable for women? Trades have not tackled this problem in any effective way, even if they would very much benefit from having a female perspective on an ever growing world that needs actual human beings to perform these jobs

[Anonymous No.10310865]

>>10308764
It's already been made extremely approachable for women. Society has made tremendous efforts to get women into CS. Millions of federal money has been spent and countless schools and businesses have created special programs specifically designed to get girls into CS and to hire more women for jobs in CS. And there's already lots of women in CS. There's just even more men and boys don't seem to need these special programs to get interested in CS.

[Anonymous No.10310871]

>>10308764
We need more female coders because they're better at it.

https://www.livescience.com/53729-bias-against-female-coders.html

[Anonymous No.10310903]

>>10310871
>Analyse 20 times more contributions by men just to skew your data by 4%.
>Then make an outlandish claim.
No, it is invalid, due to poor methodology.
If it had looked at equals amounts of datapoints, I doubt there would be anything more than a statistical error of difference.