But this is a conversation about existing technologists. About people being welcomed into a community as leaders versus being held at arms' length as outsiders. About the disproportionate representation of a single demographic in tech.
As to the race thing, I get it. It's an uncomfortable conversation to have. People work hard in their careers, it's uncomfortable for someone to come over and point out that they got there with the help of a ladder they didn't know they had.
Growing up poor sucks no matter how you look, no matter who your ancestors are. But let's also be real – growing up poor versus growing up poor plus the additional disadvantages that stack up when you're not part of the majority, those can still be very different experiences.
The existing technologists are by and large under 30 at these conferences (I won't go into the ageism to go with economic problems of computing), so they are a result of the no cheap entry barrier I talked about. Fixing the current demographic is long past solving.
I think your last line is presumptuous. I didn't get a +1 because of race, far from it actually.
It's not about you.
It's about the many people, who because of race or gender, get a -5 or worse.
> Look, the creator of Ruby is non-white
All the more damning, I think.
There's the biggest problem. You only consider two criteria and leave all the rest. If you care about community and people, you care about raising all ships. We have a huge problem in computer programming that the financially well off are going to be the only ones who can put the years in to be very good. The kid whose parents cannot afford the piano isn't going to become a virtuoso without help and computer have been there since the late 90's.
I wonder how many people arguing only for those two criteria use the word "fly-over" or talk about middle America like everyone is mentally deficient.
I was refused an internship because the area code of my high school and the area code of my college were the same. That's socio-economic, because the state has one area code, no local help or guidance about getting scholarships (no internet either), and state school had scholarships & recruiters. Opportunities are not lost only because of two attributes.
I'm a white dude whose biological parent is non-white dude who grew up in a disadvantaged socio-economic background, and I got to tell you that is probably one of the more offensive lines I have read recently. I am white and male and technology was not pretty accessible.
The only part I got lucky with was that the late 80's and early 90's had a class of entry computers that were wiped out by video game consoles and Windows. They were available and my Dad made one hell of a good decision. Schools who cannot afford vocational programs were not going to afford computer programming. If I had been born 10 years earlier or later then I would not be in a technology field.
I have seen too many people make assumptions based on race that should have been made on wealth and location. Using race as a proxy is wrong.
What opportunities does a young boy or girl from a disadvantaged background have to get into programming? Libraries and schools are not the answer. They have locked computers to keep people from being problems. There are programs to buy kids musical instruments but not computers. OLPC is basically a foreign aid program as you cannot go an buy a kid one.
You want some diversity, skip looking at what-is and look at the next generation. The C64 died in 1994, what was the replacement on ramp to programming. It sure as heck isn't the web browser. Our field is not diverse because of socio-economics. It costs almost like a young hockey player to be a good programmer.
// someone going to make that stupid inflation argument again and I would point to how the under $200 price point is still important (look at tablets)