While privacy is important, and a meritocracy is, well, meritocratic, these systems weren't formed overnight, and aren't even necessarily accepted as 'right' in many parts of the world. Historically, social barriers (e.g. discrimination against short people) are changed through exposure, discussion and sometimes fighting. Writing a post like this is only part of the answer. Taking the opportunity to understand the bias and discussing it with those who hold opposing viewpoints is another part of the answer.
I don't understand what your point is. Is it that Kyle Neath should take a stronger role in the fight against (height/age/gender/race/....) discrimination? It is probably hard because if you are working full-time as a software dev, you don't have much time to also lead a social struggle.
Sorry, 2am haze. My point is that instead of accepting privacy as the answer to the discrimination issue, use the opportunity to make the case that this needs to be talked about. The post did part of the 'talking', but the conclusion negated this. I read it as 'we shouldn't be discriminated against, therefore let's not give them anything to discriminate against'. That's not how social change is brought about.
While privacy is important, and a meritocracy is, well, meritocratic, these systems weren't formed overnight, and aren't even necessarily accepted as 'right' in many parts of the world. Historically, social barriers (e.g. discrimination against short people) are changed through exposure, discussion and sometimes fighting. Writing a post like this is only part of the answer. Taking the opportunity to understand the bias and discussing it with those who hold opposing viewpoints is another part of the answer.
Privacy is a right, don't use it as a crutch.