Slashdot Mirror


Your Next Job Interview Could Be With a Racist Bot (thedailybeast.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Daily Beast: Companies across the nation are now using some rudimentary artificial intelligence, or AI, systems to screen out applicants before interviews commence and for the interviews themselves. As a Guardian article from March explained, many of these companies are having people interview in front of a camera that is connected to AI that analyzes their facial expressions, their voice and more. One of the top recruiting companies doing this, Hirevue, has large customers like Hilton and Unilever. Their AI scores people using thousands of data points and compares it to the scores of the best current employees. But that can be unintentionally problematic. As Recode pointed out, because most programmers are white men, these AI are actually often trained using white male faces and male voices. That can lead to misperceptions of black faces or female voices, which can lead to the AI making negative judgments about those people. The results could trend sexist or racist, but the employer who is using this AI would be able to shift the blame to a supposedly neutral technology. Companies are also having people do their first interview with an AI chatbot. "One popular AI that does this is called Mya, which promises a 70 percent decrease in hiring time," reports The Daily Beast. "Any number of questions these chatbots could ask could be proxies for race, gender or other factors."

8 of 334 comments (clear)

  1. Blind hiring by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We have sexist hiring now. What about all those blind hiring trials that ended up hiring more men... and then got cancelled and the result buried ASAP.

    So we do have sexist hiring now... just not the kind feminists want to talk about.

    1. Re:Blind hiring by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      People aren't equal. Social science is rife with poor statistics, awful controls, unrepeatable experiments and outright fraud. The Nordic countries have tried this experiment and demonstrated conclusively that when you remove barriers, biology maximises and women avoid science and maths.

      Add all that lot up, and feminists have to either admit they are completely wrong or slander and insult anyone who dares point out reality.

      P.S. Blind hiring demonstrated that we discriminate against men and in favour of women - by any/all of the measures that feminists routinely employ. It's tell you want to ignore them when they aren't in your favour.

  2. TRANSLATION: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Translation: The sick freaks of the left are concerned that AI's will not be front-loaded with the politically-correct amount of anti-white bias, as defined by shrieking fascist moron SJW's.

  3. It's absolutely ridiculous and dehumanizing by ZorinLynx · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I know somebody looking for a retail job. She would walk into stores and ask if they're hiring, only to be directed to a website where you have to fill out some massive 100 question test and hope that your name is picked by some algorithm for the manager to call and arrange an interview.

    She must not fit the computerized profile that the tests are looking for, because she rarely got called back. It's been a frustrating and dehumanizing experience.

    My mother said that when she was looking for retail jobs in the 60s and 70s, it was easy as hell. See a "Help Wanted" sign, walk inside, talk to the manager, have a quick interview, and if they liked you, you were hired. You didn't even need a freaking resume. It was a much more sensible experience.

    I work in IT and I think computers are neat and have changed the world in many ways for the better. But holy shit have they totally fucked up other things.

    1. Re:It's absolutely ridiculous and dehumanizing by ooloorie · · Score: 5, Insightful

      My mother said that when she was looking for retail jobs in the 60s and 70s, it was easy as hell.

      We have let in 20-30 million low skilled workers since then. That's why the supply of low skilled workers is high and exceeds demand.

      Another reason for computerizing these hires is to remove the possibility of bias and to comply with regulations. Companies don't want to be accused of civil rights violations, illegal questions, or sexual harassment, and computerized interviews avoid that.

      But holy shit have they totally fucked up other things.

      This isn't the fault of computers, it's the fault of progressive government policies that backfired.

      You want one-on-one interviews? Reduce the supply of low-skilled workers and reduce the stifling regulations and legal risks that surround hiring.

    2. Re:It's absolutely ridiculous and dehumanizing by ooloorie · · Score: 5, Insightful

      These forms are often used to actively discriminate, because their operation is opaque and it is extremely difficult to prove anything when the computer says no.

      You are probably right: these forms are probably used to avoid being accused of racial discrimination and to meet diversity quotas and affirmative action goals. That is, they actively discriminate, precisely in order to ensure that they are complying with the law.

      For example, they often ask what your highest level of education is. Never mind if you have decades of experience and professional certifications, That can make it very hard for people who have the skills but didn't go the traditional university+debt mountain route.

      If you have decades of experience, you have referrals; you don't need to answer computerized questions or forms. If you have neither a degree nor referrals, you are indeed not interesting to most companies.

    3. Re:It's absolutely ridiculous and dehumanizing by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Natives "won't take" such jobs because they're underpaid and dangerous, due to the massive number of illegals working for less than minimum wage. If industry had to pay prevailing wages and adhere to all US laws, magically people would appear out of the woodwork to staff those jobs.

      If we actually have a shortage of workers, let Congress determine that this is so and make a guest worker program for them. Apply for the visa in Mexico City, enter America legally, employers pay fair wages, workers receive all US legal protections. Everybody wins. Well, except the shit industries that operate illegal, dangerous work environments, they'd lose. But fuck them.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
  4. Clickbait by liefer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Stop posting these Reddit-level stories that are designed to get people riled up