1. 1
  1.  

  2. 4

    I’m not sure I believe the conclusion. Maybe? Hard to say. But it feels like the logic is “bad thing happened, not many women in tech, bad thing would not happen if more women in tech”. I don’t see the direct connection though. People are people.

    Maybe someone can correct me?

    1. 3

      Well, the head of Epic (massive, massive EHR vendor) is a woman and founder, and they’ve basically ruined healthcare, so not all data points are great.

    2. 1

      Although my instinct does not reject it, I would have loved a reference for this quote:

      “We look at systems like that that go awry and realise 85 per cent of that population [of engineers] is male.

      1. 4

        Good engineers know that correlation is causation.

        1. 2

          I’m honestly not sure whether you’re being sarcastic here. Care to clarify? I haven’t seen a lot of snark from you on this site, so I don’t think so, but on the other hand correlation does indeed not imply causation. Thus my confusion. (Language could also be a factor. 15 years of living in England has taught me to see sarcasm almost everywhere.)

          1. 3

            I was responding more to the quote than your comment, probably the source of confusion. I think we agree.

            The best I’d say about correlation and causation is that they are correlated. :)