Watchdog finds AI tools can be used unlawfully to filter candidates by race, gender The UK's data protection watchdog finds that AI recruitment technologies can filter candidates according to protected characteristics including race, gender, and sexual orientation. The Information Commissioner's Office also said that in trying to guard against unfair bias in recruitment, AI tools could then infer such …
Hold your horses. You do know that a hack to allow positive discrimination is to declare a diverse workforce as a requirement of the organisation. The organisation (HR) will produce lots of graphs about the financial benefit of diversity. Points will be awarded to select candidates and at interview based on what they can contribute to the companies diversity.
the thing will soon be erased from history. After all, Trump called his opponent for POTUS a mentally deficient DEI hire.
In the USA, AI will soon determine if you are white enough for a government job. Women need not apply. Their job is to produce babies.
Well, that's the dystopian world that the people behind Project 2025 want and there were a lot of turkeys voting for christmas this week.
I think that's unlikely.
No true patriotic American president is going to put ideology before money.
Government jobs will be open to all party members who pay $$ monthly subscription, half of which goes to the party leader. Promotion will naturally follow those who demonstrate their suitability by subscribing to the higher membership tiers
You see that the job posting says they welcome all candidates to apply regardless of race, gender identity, sexual orientation, disability, age, and think it means the company discriminates against white men.
In reality, racial minorities whiten their resumes to improve their chances of getting a callback.
Minority job applicants are “whitening” their resumes by deleting references to their race with the hope of boosting their shot at jobs, and research shows the strategy is paying off.
In fact, companies are more than twice as likely to call minority applicants for interviews if they submit whitened resumes than candidates who reveal their race—and this discriminatory practice is just as strong for businesses that claim to value diversity as those that don’t.
It's easy to imagine that if you're qualified and aren't getting callbacks, the interviews are going to the racial minorities. But racial minorities are getting fewer callbacks than you, statistically.
Stop with the virtue signalling already.
The era of woke is coming to a close.
White people have been demonised enough and are now the downtrodden evil empire so stop with the bashing.
If you’re a white, middle aged heterosexual male you’re deemed to add nothing to a company’s “diversity and inclusion” goals so you’re basically equivalent to dog mess on a shoe.
The idea that recruiting more people of a different sex, sexual preference, gender or race will better your firm instead of what should be focused on — ability to do job well - bizarrely remains a priority thanks to the mainstream media.
It’s all nonsense.
I know managers who give the diverse a weighted score . Basically if you look diverse you score more points because then you can appear in photographs and can be put forward for X of the year industry award. Score counts towards interview. If you do not look diverse then you have the same job chance of someone who is not diverse.
What does rewind the tape mean and how would you do it?
Rewinding the tape means to position the tape at the Beginning of Tape marker. I would give the following commands to make the tape drive, via the operating system, do so (presuming the tape is already mounted and assigned to LUN 70):
/REWIND,70
"What are these "real benefits" which AI can bring to recruitment and hiring?"
Speed. You get way more resumes than you want to read, so you just throw them all into the AI and read the three it puts highest on the viability score list. Throwing all the resumes down a staircase, reading the first three you pick up, and recycling the rest might only be slightly worse for finding a good candidate, but doing that makes it really obvious that you're too lazy to do the job right. Having a big AI company with a complex statistical report of usefulness which they refer to but you can't read makes it feel like you're getting useful help with your task.
"You get way more resumes than you want to read, so you just throw them all into the AI and read the three it puts highest on the viability score list. "
Since this is what they'll be doing as an MBA will see it as 'efficient', you have to loosen up and tailor the lies on your resume to fit the post.
So ?
I lost my job in 2011 (yeah, right after the two towers). I spent two years and sent dozens of applications every month during that time.
I got two answers, and one interview where I was told that I was highly qualified, but they just weren't hiring at that time. I could have choked the bastard for making me take a 90-minute train ride to hear that.
You were turned down for 100 applications on a web platform ?
Cry me a river.
That's down to not lying effectively on your resume/application to get you into an interview where you can lie again so you get a further interview with somebody that knows what the job is. If you know how to do the job (assuming the description was intelligible), buggerum and do what you need to get in front of the right person and then own up.
This is very true.
I’d say approximately 50-60% of tech candidates I’ve interviewed have massively exaggerated their abilities and knowledge, usually applying for senior roles when they’re junior at best (and that’s a stretch with some of them!).
I also found that Indian candidates are the most likely to exaggerate the skill set, whereas other folks tend to go the other way and either underplay their skills or just - well - tell the truth….
Regard exaggeration, I would never do that, if you do you are likely to find yourself hired as the expert and have a huge mess to clear up.
You can judge someone’s competence as a fellow techie fairly easily, and things such as I haven’t worked on xxx myself but I have used yyy so the principles should be the same will endear you to an interviewer more.
However if you are bing interviewed by a HR drone then they are looking for boxes ticked.
Mind you one of the most telling job applications I ever had resulted in the following exchange.
Interviewer: why do you want to work for Deloitte?
Me: I am currently out of work and you are advertising a position that looks like it is suitable
(Pause)
Interviewer: I have never had anyone say that in an interview before
Me: well it is the honest answer.
Interviewer: normally people say how much they admire the company, want to make a difference ……….
The application didn’t go any further and I was told it was because of the reply to question above,
"The application didn’t go any further and I was told it was because of the reply to question above,"
Yeah, you're expected to have memorised the company anthem (not sure if Deloitte actually have one) and offer to sing it, show them that you had the company name tattooed across your heart in expectation of being bestowed the honour of working for them etc
"Regard exaggeration, I would never do that, if you do you are likely to find yourself hired as the expert and have a huge mess to clear up."
There's the "whopper" and then there's the "little white lie". Most CAD programs are very similar so if you know one, getting up to speed on a different one isn't that hard. The upshot is that if the company asks if you are versed in one, you say "yes". I see so many posts that demand proficiency in M$ Office. I use Libre Office, but same thing. What's usually odd is having to know Powerpoint when the position is engineering/technical. What the hell would I be doing with Powerpoint? I'm sure I could figure it out if I really needed to (I'd likely cheat and use Keynote, though).
I can't code in Fortran. If I said I could to get the job, that would a big problem. It's not something I could learn in an afternoon like a new PCB layout program. I know a couple of PCB programs already so learning the next one wouldn't be that hard. I've muddled through that sort of thing before where I didn't "learn" the new program, but could figure out enough of it to do what I needed. I wouldn't say I'm much of a programmer, but I can search through to find the pieces that might need updating to interface with hardware, update that and send it over to somebody that can code for review and to commit.
I’d say approximately 50-60% of tech candidates I’ve interviewed have massively exaggerated their abilities and knowledge
And most of the rest have clearly used some form of 'AI' to fill in their CV..
(Saw that with a recent job we were advertising. Those immediately went into the discard pile)
Ah, the mandatory lip service to the technocracy.
What benefits exactly? Is it possible that "human resources" folks aren't competent enough any longer to manage without an automaton to make their decisions for them?
HR used to be called Personnel -- the emphasis then being on people. That seems to have fallen largely by the wayside, but the use of "AI" for staff selection seems the final fatal step on the path to the automatisation of humans.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
