Business Intelligence and Stat Computing: The White Man's Last Stand

Unknown White Male
Image via Wikipedia

Name an industry in which top level executives are mostly white males, new recruits are mostly male (white or Indian/Chinese), women are primarily shunted into publicity relationships, social media or marketing.

Statistical Computing And Business Intelligence are the white man’s last stand to preserve an exclusive club of hail fellow well met and lets catch up after drinks culture. Newer startups are the exception in the business intelligence world , but  a whiter face helps (so do an Indian or Chinese male) to attract a mostly male white venture capital industry.

I have earlier talked about technology being totally dominated by Asian males at grad student level and ASA membership almost not representing minorities like blacks and yes women- but this is about corporate culture in the traditional BI world.

If you are connected to the BI or Stat Computing world, who would you rather hire AND who have you actually hired- with identical resumes

White Male or White Female or Brown Indian Male/Female or Yellow Male/Female or Black Male or Black Female

How many Black Grad Assistants do you see in tech corridors- (Nah- it is easier to get a  hard working Chinese /Indian- who smiles and does a great job at $12/hour)

How many non- Asian non white Authors do you see in technology and does that compare to pie chart below


racist image Pictures, Images and Photos

Note_ 2010 Census numbers arent available for STEM, and I was unable to find ethnic background for various technology companies, because though these numbers are collected for legal purposes, they are not publicly shared.

Any technology company which has more than 40% women , or more than 10% blacks would be fairly representative to the US population. Anecdotal evidence suggests European employment for minorities is worse (especially for Asians) but better for women.

Any data sources to support/ refute these hypothesis are welcome for purposes of scientific inquiry.

racist math image Pictures, Images and Photos

Libre Office

Some ambiguity about Libre Office and why it needed to change from Open Office- just when Open Office seemed so threatening on the desktop

FROM- http://www.documentfoundation.org/faq/

Q: So is this a breakaway project?

A: Not at all. The Document Foundation will continue to be focused on developing, supporting, and promoting the same software, and it’s very much business as usual. We are simply moving to a new and more appropriate organisational model for the next decade – a logical development from Sun’s inspirational launch a decade ago.

Q: Why are you calling yourselves “The Document Foundation”?

A: For ten years we have used the same name – “OpenOffice.org” – for both the Community and the software. We’ve decided it removes ambiguity to have a different name for the two, so the Community is now “The Document Foundation”, and the software “LibreOffice”. Note: there are other examples of this usage in the free software community – e.g. the Mozilla Foundation with the Firefox browser.

Q: Does this mean you intend to develop other pieces of software?

A: We would like to have that possibility open to us in the future…

Q: And why are you calling the software “LibreOffice” instead of “OpenOffice.org”?

A: The OpenOffice.org trademark is owned by Oracle Corporation. Our hope is that Oracle will donate this to the Foundation, along with the other assets it holds in trust for the Community, in due course, once legal etc issues are resolved. However, we need to continue work in the meantime – hence “LibreOffice” (“free office”).

Q: Why are you building a new web infrastructure?

A: Since Oracle’s takeover of Sun Microsystems, the Community has been under “notice to quit” from our previous Collabnet infrastructure. With today’s announcement of a Foundation, we now have an entity which can own our emerging new infrastructure.

Q: What does this announcement mean to other derivatives of OpenOffice.org?

A: We want The Document Foundation to be open to code contributions from as many people as possible. We are delighted to announce that the enhancements produced by the Go-OOo team will be merged into LibreOffice, effective immediately. We hope that others will follow suit.

Q: What difference will this make to the commercial products produced by Oracle Corporation, IBM, Novell, Red Flag, etc?

A: The Document Foundation cannot answer for other bodies. However, there is nothing in the licence arrangements to stop companies continuing to release commercial derivatives of LibreOffice. The new Foundation will also mean companies can contribute funds or resources without worries that they may be helping a commercial competitor.

Q: What difference will The Document Foundation make to developers?

A: The Document Foundation sets out deliberately to be as developer friendly as possible. We do not demand that contributors share their copyright with us. People will gain status in our community based on peer evaluation of their contributions – not by who their employer is.

Q: What difference will The Document Foundation make to users of LibreOffice?

A: LibreOffice is The Document Foundation’s reason for existence. We do not have and will not have a commercial product which receives preferential treatment. We only have one focus – delivering the best free office suite for our users – LibreOffice.

—————————————————————————————————-

Non Microsoft and Non Oracle vendors are indeed going to find it useful the possiblities of bundling a free Libre Office that reduces the total cost of ownership for analytics software. Right now, some of the best free advertising for Microsoft OS and Office is done by enterprise software vendors who create Windows Only Products and enable MS Office integration better than  Open Office integration. This is done citing user demand- but it is a chicken egg dilemma- as functionality leads to enhanced demand. Microsoft on the other hand is aware of this dependence and has made SQL Server and SQL Analytics (besides investing in analytics startups like Revolution Analytics) along with it’s own infrastructure -Azure Cloud Platform/EC2 instances.

Protected: Analyzing SAS Institute-WPS Lawsuit

This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

Protected: SAS Institute lawsuit against WPS Episode 2 The Clone Wars

This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

Legal Copyrights- Some history

Here is an interesting blog post on why software giants like google ,microsoft will be rich foroever. And ironically Microsoft has given away the maximum number of free programs, dlls, extensions,patches. When I mean free I mean really free, they did not sell your identity to advertisers .

Back in 1998, representatives of the Walt Disney Company came to Washington looking for help. Disney’s copyright on Mickey Mouse, who made his screen debut in the 1928 cartoon short “Steamboat Willie,” was due to expire in 2003, and Disney’s rights to Pluto, Goofy and Donald Duck were to expire a few years later.

Rather than allow Mickey and friends to enter the public domain, Disney and its friends – a group of Hollywood studios, music labels, and PACs representing content owners – told Congress that they wanted an extension bill passed.

Prompted perhaps by the Disney group’s lavish donations of campaign cash – more than $6.3 million in 1997-98, according to the nonprofit Center for Responsive Politics – Congress passed and President Clinton signed the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act.

The CTEA extended the term of protection by 20 years for works copyrighted after January 1, 1923. Works copyrighted by individuals since 1978 got “life plus 70” rather than the existing “life plus 50”. Works made by or for corporations (referred to as “works made for hire”) got 95 years. Works copyrighted before 1978 were shielded for 95 years, regardless of how they were produced.

%d bloggers like this: