Further... I ended up writing a lot here.

> Black students report to us a very different experience. They may have never been selected for an internship because of implicit bias in resume reviews or interviews. They hear about fewer opportunities from friends, because their social networks are often segregated. The companies they might meet at our career fairs tend to address problems that resonate with our White and Asian students because White and Asian people run those companies.

This runs completely contrary to what I've seen in the industry, which is hungry for any amount of diversity it can get - whether that's for honest reasons or to cover as an insurance policy against Cancel Culture is a different story, of course.

What are these "problems that resonate with White and Asian students" that don't resonate with Black students? And where are Hispanics, and Jews, and Indians, and Native Americans in this narrative? Do the problems resonate with them? Why or why not?

I get it, most SaaS companies are working on totally bullshit twee products for taking pictures of cats and toast and whatever other bugman crap they think they can make money on. Doesn't resonate with me either, but I need to be employed, much as a tradesman might not give a shit about the ugly building they're employed to build, but they still show up to do the work. For the average grad, the ability to select your employer is a huge luxury; many people don't have that opportunity. If you don't like the selection of jobs available in your area, move; if you don't like the selection of jobs in your industry, maybe you took the wrong major.

> Of course, all of this is despite the existence of Black-owned technology companies across the country, and companies that have an abundance of Black engineers. We just don’t know about those companies, or have relationships with them, which is its own form of structural racism.

She doesn't name any examples. I don't know about these companies either, mind you; but as someone who chooses products based on the products rather than the social narrative of the company in question, I don't think I should have to care. Let the work speak for itself and success will follow, generally speaking. Having to choose products based on the race of the owner of the company seems like a huge step backwards.

> But it goes deeper than that. Many have CS faculty have argued to me that even if those structures are racist, and even if one is in charge of those racist structures, they still don’t have the responsibility to fix it, because the world simply isn’t fair. They say: Yes, Black Americans might have to be an order of magnitude luckier, work an order of magnitude harder, and be an order of magnitude more resilient just to achieve the same things that White and Asian students do. But that’s their problem, not mine, and I can’t change our country’s racist history. They’ll just have to work harder than everyone else. This, I believe, is the heart of why academic programs continue to be anti-Black: program leaders deny a basic principle of fairness in education, do not want to have to do the work to achieve that fairness, or do not see how achieving fairness will help them personally.

They don't have to be an order of magnitude _anything_. They merely have to be at the same level, and this is the problem, of course; but Ko can't look at the data on that (hatefacts!), nor could she address it, so under the rug it goes, in favour of a narrative that presents anyone around her who is not using their sinecure to virtue signal on Medium as an oppressor that won't hire someone because of their race.