The author is responding to a very short article, but I'm not certain that he/she carefully read it.<p>> Michael Seibel: 11.8% of the founders who applied were women and around 3% percent of the founders were either Black or Hispanic. Of the founders we funded in our most recent batch, 11.1% of the founders are women [...] 3.7% of the founders are Hispanic, and 4% of the founders are Black.<p>> JDCarlu: Knowing that only 3% of YC batch is latino makes it feel like something is wrong. The issue is to understand why is this happening? How many latinos teams apply to YC? How many makes it through?<p>> Michael Seibel: The good news is that there is no disadvantage to applying to YC as a female or minority founder. The bad news, of course, is that applicant percentages are low relative to the entire population.<p>> JDCarlu: Is there a problem with YC filter or are latinos not interested in tech?<p>So, the questions become: Why is the applicant percentage of latinos so low relative to the population? And then, if that is something you would like to see change, what is the most practical means to effectively change it?
Even though I agree with the author in terms of moral hypocrisy, what is the better alternative for the existing system?<p>Of course, we can suggest many alternatives. But the implementation requires the buy in from the people who have loads of money. Then, this boils down to the personal preference of capitalist or the moneyed interests.<p>Isn't it (one's personal preference, that is) the same as people of the same kind club together. Like alumni clubs of elite schools; paypal alumni; friends of the big money and power. How can one destroy such networks? Even some hypothetical system destroys such networks, such a hypothetical system ends up setting up another network: think of the polit bureau of the Chinese community party. These politburo members own various industries in China.