No. No. No. Fucking no!

It is not. As a Hispanic, no one prevented me from getting into Computer Science, graduating from that field and making a good career out of it just based on my race, ethnicity or whatever. It was just me, myself and my efforts. My sister, being a Hispanic woman, she did not have a "racial" problem getting into Math (and graduating). There are no Jim-Crow-like establishments that prevents people like me from getting into STEM. So, no, Computer Science education is not racist.

Saying so is just bullshit race baiting designed to distract people from the actual social problems that pervade the African American and Hispanic communities. It is a lot easier to race bait than to actually fix shit. This is pretty much what this whole endeavor amounts to.

People choose STEM (and in particular Computer Science) based on a variety of social factors. In the US, women shy away to go into STEM, but you see this as less of an issue with the many Chinese and Indian female colleagues I have had the honor to work with. The same occurs with African American and Hispanic students.

To begin with (and I say this from the POV of a minority) our African American and Hispanic cultures have significant problems that lead students away from certain subjects and careers. This is in parallel with American society at large where women are conditioned to stay away from STEM fields.

Consider the following: it is well known that many African American kids (and Hispanic kids to a lesser) degree do not know how to swim. But we know that the causes are cultural as well as economical: African American and Hispanic neighborhoods are on average of a lower income than Non-Hispanic Caucasian and Asian communities, with poorer infrastructure and less amenities: that include pools. Furthermore, lower income means lesser variety of extra-curricular activities (including swimming.)

But we don't go and ask "is swimming racist"? It would be a stupid question for obvious reasons. But why is it then that when people ask the same about Computer Science (and STEM in general) we do not see this as a stupid question?

Computer Science is the field of computing, an off shot of Discrete Mathematics. This is not about artistic expression, but hard science of numbers and computing. We could also propose the same for Math and Physics because not that many Hispanics and African Americans and American-born women go into those fields.

The solution is not to plaster Computer Science education with multicultural trivia and singing kumbaya and shit. The solution involves solving the economic gaps that pervade in the African American and Hispanic communities (and let's be honest, to have those communities solve the systemic cultural issues that keep *us* from partaking in process of fostering technology and science.)

Anything less than that is lipstick-on-a-pig, sugar-coating bullshit.

Things like fizzbuzz tests aren't random out-of-the-air tests. Or say, a "hot-potatoe" game, or any other thing that involves a different action based on two or three counters inside a loop. Any competent programmer should be able to do that without having to rely on esoteric, obscure. seldom used programming trivia.

It is not like people are asking "code me a machine learning algorithm that does clustering in, I dunno, prolog" or "can you write a recursive function that approximates the square root of a number" or "write a lambda calculus interpreter" or "develop a markov chain upper-shit in LOLCODE".

People are asking very simple, dumb-as-fuck programming tests that involve nothing more than a bunch of loops and some if-statements, and people that claim to be programmers are failing.

A person that claims an extensive programming experience should be able to complete such silly code tests. Moreover, those silly code tests are much simpler to administer than a more realistic, work-related scenario (.ie. "develop a service which supports both REST and WS-* interfaces, and that can persist its input on a database").

That is why employers use such silly tests, and why expert developers should be able to do them without significant effort.

You would be better serve by taking a few classes in Economics than by reading some post on the internet. But to give you an e-lecture is just too good to pass.

See, imagine if something were to happen to Silicon Valley, and half the engineers employed there become unemployed. Google collapses and shit. Don't you think such an event would affect the economy? Or do you live in an isolated compound somewhere in Montana, living off the earth and shit?

I mean, think what happened when IBM left South Florida. The tech region never recovered because there were a whole bunch of ancillary businesses dependent on IBM. And all the jobs in the service industry that depended on the engineers spending money.

So we have one of the largest engineering firms in the world losing a 4 billion contract. Are you that much of an ignorant idiot to think that won't have a negative effect on the American economy?

That. Does. Not. Compute.

Seriously, this suggests a totally messed up network setup (and/or the networking guys didn't what the hell they were doing.)

A BIOS attack that would computers across the country. For anyone with a hint of tech awareness, can you smell the utter bullshit and in-feasibility of such a premise? And why would China want to do that when it is joined to the hip to the US and global economies?

This reminds me of mediocre plot lines from moronic tech movies like "Eagle Eye" and shit like that. This is just another cry-wolf like "ZOMG WMD IN IRAQISTAN! 'MURIKA!", but this time is more like "ZOMG ZOMBIE BIOS FROM THEM JAPS... OR IS IT CHINKS??? NO MATTER, WE'LL BOMB THE FUCK OUT OF YOU INTO FREEDOM, 'MURIKA!"

I just wonder how many illiterati will actually fall for this tripe.

Not for a person whose first language is not English (that is, moi.)

This. Content consumption =/= content creation. Sadly, the nuisance is missed to many in this supposedly nerd realm that slashdot is supposed to be.

^^ This. You hit the nail on the head as this is the root of the problem. But it is not just a NSA problem, not even a CIA/Defense problem. The entire modus operandi of the nation, from public to private, has shifted towards contracting and sub-contracting. Everyone has a piece of the pie, but no one has ownership when SHTF.

There are riches to be made without pesky details like responsibility and accountability. Our institutions, both public and private operate in a manner that epitomize the term moral hazard.

People in this country don't keep tabs on how expensive things have become. Things that people once took for granted (specially college savings for one's children.) Unless something drastic change in this country, these 20-somethings will have a rude awakening when they try to set roots.

There used to be a time when it was ok for me live in a shit hole with no care in the world other than getting to work and eat pizza. With a family, things change (and so do the cost of living.)

Well, there is the thing. Unless I work across county lines, I don't need an hour of commute to get that house that I'm describing in South Florida. Same if I were in Seattle or Austin or even in a larger metropolis like Dallas/Ft. Worth. I did my research and I know that I could get a cheaper home far away from SF (say around Livermore). But it is not just about price. It is also about commute time, school districts, public amenities, and a lot of other conveniences (or the absence of significant inconveniences), all factors that one must take into account when we have family responsibilities.

Now just as you argue that one can get a cheaper house at a 1-hour-commute distance from San Francisco, I can get such a house for much more less than the SoFla price I described if I expand my house search off Broward country, and into either Homestead (at the southernmost corner of Dade county) or around Wellington, mid-to-north West Palm Beach county (either place resulting in a 1+ hour commute.)

But as it is, with the house I mention in Broward county, I get immediate access to the best school districts in the entire state, within 20-30 minutes drive to a major university and to the local community college and to two separate tech hubs that house most of the tech jobs in the county.

I know that I can make a similar comparisons in other tech (or semi-tech) metro areas like Orlando, Seattle, or Austin because I've been researching this for quite some time.

I cannot get *all of those things* in SF for the same price tag. So it is a valid argument to count the entire area about SF, which is a shame. The best companies operate there. Great if you are single. Not so great if you plan to have a new start there with a family. The ROI is simply not there.

Not just big house, but actually *house*, like *house with a patio*. What you guys in NYC or the Bay Area call a *house* that can be afforded by one person (and only one person) salary, that is just a hole in a wall. If I had to put my family into that (that is, moving there and live in a micro-house because that's what a *competitive* salary can give me), I would move us all to Tokyo instead (I would much prefer to live in Tokyo than in SF and NYC.)

Obviously that is your right to feel like that. For me, as a man of responsibilities, I cannot make such emotional decisions. It's not that I love South Florida. I actually hate a lot of it (and I'm still actively considering leaving somewhere else - that is how I came to research the crap out of my options in the Bay Area.)

But, as it is right now, it is a good ROI. We still have a few blue chip companies and other large tech employers that can pay decently. College education (undergrad and grad) is pretty much a fraction of what it would cost in the Bay Area. It is not as sophisticated as other metropolis, but it is cosmopolitan and diverse enough, which is what I want my daughters to be exposed to as they grow up.

It is not just *big house*, for otherwise, I would have moved to some cowtown a long time ago.

As a parent, if someone where to offer me 2x$250K salary to move to South Florida or just about anywhere (from, say, the Bay Area), you can bet I would take the chance.

Why? Because that type of salary would ensure I could pay a home mortgage in its totality and my children's college funds in just a few years. We would save enough to retirement shortly after that. I would guarantee us the financial independence to live wherever we want after that.

I wouldn't say no to such an offer. It would not be the responsible thing to do for a person with my responsibilities.

Either you are being deliberately obtuse, or you went through your school years without learning an iota of reading comprehension. Let me re-quote myself, with bold to help you deal with the complexities of middle school reading skills:

In South Florida (Broward County to be more specific), a 3/2 home with a decent patio (say 5K square feet), in a good school district, with a two-car garage, could cost me approximately $250K tops.

A similar house in San Francisco will cost me NO LESS THAN $750K. No less.

Now, let's do the math since, you know, this is a site for geeks and shit like that.

A typical down payment could be about 5%. 20% if we go with a conventional loan.

Such a down payment on the hypothetical South Florida house would amount to $12K tops (or $50K with a conventional loan.) Those are median values, meaning you can be able to pay less.

Now take those percentages and apply it to the comparable San Francisco home. What do we get? The lower end of a down payment becomes $36K. For a conventional loan, it would be $150K. And these are no median values, these are bottom values.

I do not know about but I cannot make a $150K down payment, not unless both my wife and I make half-a-million combined a year. Considering I am forced to pay PMI insurance if I don't pay at least a 20% down payment, I don't think I want to make a $35K down payment just to scratch off %5 of the base price.

Regardless of whether I were to pay 5% or 20% off such a property, the monthly mortgage payment will be eating my paychecks. I would be living just to pay such a house. Forget about college savings for my two little girls (which is pretty much what my wife and I save for) and forget about sending my girls to see their grandparents over seas.

Either that or I have to give up having a patio for my kids to play. Heck, I would have to give up living in a house and rent a hole in the wall just to be able to save for a rainy day.

In South Florida, with my current salary by myself, on the other hand, I can make a $12k down payment (or with great sacrifice a $50K taking down 20% of the property and thus skip paying PMI insurance.)

Either way, my mortgage payments would not eat my salary, and I can save for college savings, pay for my kids's extra curricular activities, and I dunno, perhaps get a decent car for my wife to take my kids around to school and stuff.

So if you are too fucking stupid to wonder why I need that to make me happy, I guess my short answer is: shit, I want my kids to have a patio. Nothing fancy, just some patch of grass where I can put a swing or something, maybe a dog. A place where my kids can invite their friends to pay as they grow up. I don't want to live in a hole in a wall like in Tokyo (I've been there, I know how that is) which is what I will have to live like in San Francisco. And call me crazy and vain, but shit, I would like to live in a good school district. And to add insult to injury, I would like to buy a new car when needed, and I would like to retain my ability to pay shit in cash as opposed to live on a line of credit.

In other words, I would like to retain my financial independence and be able to save for my kids' college education, and my retirement, and a vacation here and there. Since I slugged my way through college while flipping burgers and driving forklifts at the Home Depot, I don't know, I feel I might have a chance to do so. Crazy, I know!!!

Nothing outrageous, just the normal shit one would expect to be able to attain with a college education in a 1st world country. I can do that with one salary alone in South Florida. We would need two salaries making up half-a-mill in San Francisco.

So banal and selfish, right, right, right? It's like shit, this dude is just kinda like totally untrustworthy, right up to Mardoff caliber. I'm what's wrong with 'MURICA!

So, as of what I'm like to work with? I will leave that to your imagination, using my oh-so-vain and despicable material wishes of not having to put the bulk of my income on paying for a regular house, not a fancy house, but a regular house with a white fence and shit.

Here is a quarter. Now go to a public phone and call Michael Moore so that he can make a documentary about how selfish and untrustworthy and pain-to-work-asshole I am.

Bingo. That's the reason I decided not to move to SF. I was interviewing aggressively with several companies, but did the math. I needed to make $250K... and my wife had to make about the same just for the both of us to buy a house that I can buy in South Florida (not a cheap real state market) with just my salary alone.

Companies like Google and FB provide good perks, and they are great if one is willing to sacrifice a lot of other commodities like home space and such. It is too bad that the real state situation in SF is so absurd because it is a great place to work and live. But the cost is simply not acceptable. It is not an acceptable trade-off, and I rather move to Seattle or Austin, which though not as big tech hubs as SF/SV, they are good enough with much more acceptable cost-of-living trade-offs.

The real world is what you make of it. I work in South Florida which is a crappy place when it comes to tech jobs, but even here one can handle a career intelligently to avoid such situations. In 18 years of work in software, I've only had to deal with a horrible work environment once, and only for 6 months. And stayed there and sucked it up the horror of it because it was the expedient thing to do. By the time my contract was coming to an end, I was already prepared (again, pro-activity), and shortly after I got one of the best gigs of my life.

The key is to be proactive so that your average work experience is good enough, if not excellent, be it in SV or in, I dunno, Cowville, Montanalabama. Moreover, being proactive gives you the tools to graciously handle the odd curbs that one inevitably gets in life (even in SV.)

Speak for yourself. There are jobs like that out there, but the onus is on "you" (the generic "you") to develop a career that avoids such situations. If you manage your career wisely, such jobs, while unavoidable, they become the exception rather than the norm.

Even during the dot-com bubble, if you really have (or had) to continuously suck it up like that to bad working conditions to avoid unemployment, in the field of software to boot, you are doing something wrong with your career buddy.

When that happens, you leave. If you are paying attention to your career, you have a professional network that you can count on. You regularly scout to see what options you have. You have been smelling something afoul at work for quite sometime (again, if you are paying attention) so that kind of "line of communication" does not catch you with your pants down unprepared.

So, unless you are managing your career like a drone going throw the employment options, facing that kind of "line of communication" is a non-issue because, at worst, you already have a bunch of options and can walk away without an unreasonable fear of unemployment, and, at best, you walked out before you even got to that point.

Put down the victimhood kool aid. There is no manager-slave relation unless you are dumb enough to allow yourself to fall on one. There are good managers and bad managers just as there are good developers and bad developers. If you are a good developer, YOU CAN PROACTIVELY find good managers to work with.

Certainly not in the same universe you live in, that's for sure.

You saying it does not make it so. I'm not saying that he is not full of it, but you simply do not know and his/her explanation of not giving details is as good as your own word in the realm of internet forums. If you want to assume that, then that's your right, but don't pretend to assume that your assumption is a (probable or absolute) fact.

There were a couple of stories by ex-googlers indicating some serious systemic problems in their work environment and culture (no pun intended but just google it). It is not all roses and bunnies in a geek bliss reaching nerdvana.

It is not to say it is a bad company or a profitable one. But it does have some serious issues in the way it operates that, if left unattended (and that is a big if), the will eventually come back to haunt the company in the typical bizness-101-what-not-to-do-list fashion.