AI-infused hiring programs have drawn scrutiny, most notably over whether they end up exhibiting biases based on the data they’re trained on.

AI-infused hiring programs have drawn scrutiny, most notably over whether they end up exhibiting biases based on the data they’re trained on.

  • cornbread@lemm.eeEnglish
    1·
    1 year ago

    That would be a pretty extreme bias to have, so yeah that would make sense. If it’s not so drastic it might be harder to spot by just looking at the results.

    • Odusei@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
      2·
      1 year ago

      It’s a flag, not the entire investigation. If something seems suspicious, that’s the queue to investigate, not just immediately slap cuffs on someone.

      • cornbread@lemm.eeEnglish
        1·
        1 year ago

        Right, that’s why I was trying to ask you for your opinion on what the threshold for “investigation worthy” results

        • Odusei@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
          1·
          1 year ago

          I’m not a policy expert, author of the bill, or in charge of the department that will lead these investigations. Even if I were an expert on the subject, what I’d do and what this department will do aren’t likely to be the same.

          I just support civilian oversight and audits of these algorithms and LLMs as they take up a more prominent position in hiring and firing.

          • cornbread@lemm.eeEnglish
            2·
            1 year ago

            I figure you’d audit it by examining the results, and if bias isn’t detectable in the results

            I was just asking for more info on how you’d examine the results for bias since it would need to be pretty extreme like the example you gave to be identifiable as something worth investigating.

            All good if you don’t have a more specific answer, I was just curious what your personal thoughts were here.