Should there be laws against A.I's hiring and firing?

[StayTuned]

unfortunately your view is going to be proven completely wrong. humans make tons of bad judgement calls when evaluating talent. i can easily see a well programmed AI exclusively making hiring choices. although i think the first thing an AI would do is scrap the current hiring model in favor of performance evaluation tests to determine the correct candidate, using criteria we currently do not use.

AI can compare scores against scores. But it will never understand how these scores were achieved.

AI has been tried and scrapped entirely. There is a reason why beyond initial scans it's not used, or not used at all. Even when applying for Google and Microsoft, the interview process is human driven. Creativity, drive and commitment cannot be tested by some AI because you cannot assign numbers to that.

AI is dumb as fuck.

So good luck waiting for the true Human AI that can do that. I wouldn't bet any money on it happening in our lifetime.

[Jonnusthegreat]

No. AI is fine. AI does not control anything. The people who created the AI are still in charge. No matter what, a person is still ultimately responsible.

[PC2]

No. AI is fine. AI does not control anything. The people who created the AI are still in charge. No matter what, a person is still ultimately responsible.

Yeah AI is fine and doesn't need to be regulated. Still that doesn't change the fact that AI is becoming more complex and advanced and it can't really be transparent so people who are not happy about decisions made by an AI will always point to it and then blame the creator, then the creator will point to the AI and blame the data. So there is a conundrum here but ultimately we need to fight against the side that is acting more like luddites and fears new technology. One of the most irrational things that society has invented is called the "precautionary principle" which is always used by pessimists in order to slow down innovation.

[Jonnusthegreat]

Yeah AI is fine and doesn't need to be regulated. Still that doesn't change the fact that AI is becoming more complex and advanced and it can't really be transparent so people who are not happy about decisions made by an AI will always point to it and then blame the creator, then the creator will point to the AI and blame the data. So there is a conundrum here but ultimately we need to fight against the side that is acting more like luddites and fears new technology. One of the most irrational things that society has invented is called the "precautionary principle" which is always used by pessimists in order to slow down innovation.

My personal philosophy is "Information is ALWAYS a good thing." How a human interprets it is an entirely different discussion.

Like when recently those scientists created a partial human embryo in a lab I was like "Awesome!" and a lot of people are like "That's morally wrong!" Like.... how? It's just technology.

[RobertoCarlos]

I know Amazon tried AI for potential hiring a few years ago, but it developed a bias against female candidates.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-a...-idUSKCN1MK08G

Well maternity leave alone makes them less desirable than men as slaves because you cant be a slave when you're giving birth in a hospital and get awarded time off thanks to pesky government oversight making slave trading slightly more difficult.

[Jonnusthegreat]

Well maternity leave alone makes them less desirable than men as slaves because you cant be a slave when you're giving birth in a hospital and get awarded time off thanks to pesky government oversight making slave trading slightly more difficult.

Giving men equal leave rights would completely eliminate that blip! Actually, it would make women more desirable than men!

[RobertoCarlos]

Giving men equal leave rights would completely eliminate that blip! Actually, it would make women more desirable than men!

Probably because on average woman live longer. So they have more years in the tank for your local slaving capitalistic needs

[Jonnusthegreat]

Probably because on average woman live longer. So they have more years in the tank for your local slaving capitalistic needs

Plus, men can sire more children than women!

[kamuimac]

AI can compare scores against scores. But it will never understand how these scores were achieved.

AI has been tried and scrapped entirely. There is a reason why beyond initial scans it's not used, or not used at all. Even when applying for Google and Microsoft, the interview process is human driven. Creativity, drive and commitment cannot be tested by some AI because you cannot assign numbers to that.

AI is dumb as fuck.

So good luck waiting for the true Human AI that can do that. I wouldn't bet any money on it happening in our lifetime.

still way smarter then people in average HR departement.

[Collegeguy]

AI can compare scores against scores. But it will never understand how these scores were achieved.

AI has been tried and scrapped entirely. There is a reason why beyond initial scans it's not used, or not used at all. Even when applying for Google and Microsoft, the interview process is human driven. Creativity, drive and commitment cannot be tested by some AI because you cannot assign numbers to that.

AI is dumb as fuck.

So good luck waiting for the true Human AI that can do that. I wouldn't bet any money on it happening in our lifetime.

Probably the future as well. Genetic engineering could easily surpass anything we could do with robots.

[StayTuned]

still way smarter then people in average HR departement.

Only average people will apply for companies with average HR departments. There is no need for an AI there.

[LilSaihah]

While I responded yes, it's hard to say definitively yes. Candidates are already filtered out on the basis of keywords in their CV.

I think it really depends on the AI. Something like an AI which instantly scrapes the entire internet for everything you've ever said is not ideal.

[Howel]

Oh my lord, I am just imagining a hiring AI, that then also implements stolen data from people. Man, the entire planet would be unemployable.
- Person watches anime for 6 hours a day - rejected.
- Person watches waaaayyy too much adult content - rejected.
- Person has kinks - rejected.
- Person somehow doesn't have data - rejected and sent forward to the FBI.
- Person watches Let's Play videos even though they are like 50 - Rejected.
- Person purchases way too much from Amazon - Rejected.
- Person said something offensive on some website - Rejected.

It'd be quite funny to watch

Oh and feel free to add to that list!

[Mister K]

Yes. Optimisations. AI can have biases depending on its rules set but still better than human hiring. Although there should still be some form of a stage with human to human interaction.

[PACOX]

Hiring is already algorithm-driven, unfortunately. Ever seen a personality test? Questions that ask how you would react in x situation? That's data to be entered into an algorithm. A lot of it is terrible at predicting human behavior and yet and a huge part of the hiring process in the US. You're already prescreened by a computer at a lot of companies.

[downnola]

The issue is that objective AI seems to reaffirm certain biases which are considered sinful in today's society, so they're coming up with all sorts of excuses as to why AI shouldn't be used.

You're a full blown culture warrior now aren't ya?

- - - Updated - - -

Yes. Optimisations. AI can have biases depending on its rules set but still better than human hiring. Although there should still be some form of a stage with human to human interaction.

There will always be human to human interaction because the most important part of the hiring process is finding out if the candidate is a good fit for your company and team. If you've been contacted for an interview, you can safely assume the person hiring you knows you're qualified to do the job or you would have been weeded out when they received your resume. The interview is a check to make sure you didn't straight up lie on your resume but it's mostly about team fit and that's something an A.I. simply isn't capable of. That's why they don't use it.

[Hellobolis]

AI to do a first pass on resumes? sure why not can't be worse than a human discarding your resume cause it "doesn't stand out" or w/e RNG first passes are already.

AI to directly hire people? i don't see a AI doing negotiations anytime too soon, so it'll prolly only be for short term minimum wage type jobs. in which case it's probably not particularly better/worse than the way those people currently get jobs. might make no experience > no job problem worse though.

AI to fire people? sounds like a lawsuit waiting to happen.