zlacker

I also sounds like a very narrow hiring profile. That is, favoring the like-minded and assimilation over free thinking and philosophical diversity. They might give off the appearance of "diversity" on the outside - which is great for PR - but under the hood it's more monocultural. Maybe?

>>chiefa+(OP)
Superficial "diversity" is all the "diversity" a company needs in the modern era.

Companies do not desire or seek philosophical diversity, they only want Superficial biologically based "diversity" to prove they have the "correct" philosophy about the world.

>>chiefa+(OP)
I think that most pushes for diversity that we see today are intended to result in monocultures.

DEI and similar programs use very specific racial language to manipulate everyone into believing whiteness is evil and that rallying around that is the end goal for everyone in a company.

On a similar note, the company has already established certain missions and values that new hires may strongly align with like: "Discovering and enacting the path to safe artificial general intelligence", given not only the excitement around AI's possibilities but also the social responsibility of developing it safely. Both are highly appealing goals that are bound to change humanity forever and it would be monumentally exciting to play a part in that.

Thus, it's safe to think that most employees who are lucky to have earned a chance at participating would want to preserve that, if they're aligned.

This kind of alignment is not the bad thing people think it is. There's nothing quite like a well-oiled machine, even if the perception of diversity from the outside falls by the wayside.

Diversity is too often sought after for vanity, rather than practical purposes. This is the danger of coercive, box-checking ESG goals we're seeing plague companies, to the extent that it's becoming unpopular to chase after due to the strongly partisan political connotations it brings.

>>phpist+i4
Agree. This is the monoculture being adopted in actuality -- a racist crusade against "whiteness", and a coercive mechanism to ensure companies don't overstep their usage of resources (carbon footprint), so as not to threaten the existing titans who may have already abused what was available to them before these intracorporate policies existed.

It's also a way for banks and other powerful entities to enforce sweeping policies across international businesses that haven't been enacted in law. In other words: if governing bodies aren't working for them, they'll just do it themselves and undermine the will of companies who do not want to participate, by introducing social pressures and boycotting potential partnerships unless they comply.

Ironically, it snuffs out diversity among companies at a 40k foot level.

>>phpist+i4
But it's not only the companies, it's the marginalized so desperate to get a "seat at the table" that they don't recognize the table isn't getting bigger and rounder. Instead, it's still the same rectangular that is getting longer and longer.

Participating in that is assimilation.

>>docmar+Ra
It's not a crusade against whiteness. Unless you're unhinged and believe a single phenotype that prevents skin cancer is somehow an obvious reflection of genetic inferiority and that those lacking it have a historical destiny to rule over the rest and are entitled to institutional privileges over them, it makes sense that companies with employees not representative of the overall population have hiring practices that are problematic, albeit not necessarily being as explicitly racist as you are.

>>jakder+Wp
Unfortunately you are wrong, and this kind of rhetoric has not only made calls for white genocide acceptable and unpunished, but has incited violence specifically against Caucasian people, as well as anyone who is perceived to adopt "white" thinking such as Asian students specifically, and even Black folks who see success in their life as a result of adopting longstanding European/Western principles in their lives.

Specifically, principles that have ultimately led to the great civilizations we're experiencing today, built upon centuries of hard work and deep thinking in both the arts and sciences, by all races, beautifully.

DEI and its creators/pushers are a subtle effort to erase and rebuild this prior work under the lie that it had excluded everyone but Whites, so that its original creators no longer take credit.

Take the movement to redefine Math concepts by recycling existing concepts using new terms defined exclusively by non-white participants, since its origins are "too white". Oh the horror! This is false, as there are many prominent non-white mathematicians that existed prior to the woke revolution, so this movement's stated purpose is a lie, and its true purpose is to eliminate and replace white influence.

Finally, the fact that DEI specifically targets "whiteness" is patently racist. Period.