101–110 of 471 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How do you quantify experience? It cannot be empirically measured in all the ways that it matters.
Do you think even the most basic measure, say number of years, is any worse than the current process?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
UK Office for National Statistics publish good data for the UK. My impression (based on 2016 stats [0]) is that as most C-suiters are men, and they can get 100s or 1000s of times the money that ordinary employees get, that in the UK this likely accounts for most of the effect that's not accounted for by career breaks (childcare, for example). To reiterate, this is my _impression_ when looking at the data. Men who wor…
Here's one example of the ONS data: https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwor...
Note they don't compare like roles here, just same industry sector IIRC.
The largest gap is 95% in favour of female archivists; that must be anomalous.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Parent was edited from “Let's see evidence of misconduct before rushing to judgment.”
But why is it flagged? That is a reasonable comment. Also, what's with the rampant brigading here. Every reasonable comment here seems to get immediately and automatically downvoted.
Hacker news voters seem to have got a lot less tolerant of this kind of tired regressive culture war stuff lately. But this article is still on the way to being flagged off the front page. There are certain subjects this site is just not capable of having a mature, informed discussion of.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You don't change things by striking, Traditionally union action including strikes has been the only way to make changes in big employers.
I've never worked for a unionized company yet hey, I've been treated fairly.
"A commitment to end pay and opportunity inequity"? I'm confused here. Are they demanding that preferential hiring and advancement practices and programs for women and certain minorities be stopped?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you think even the most basic measure, say number of years, is any worse than the current process?
Of course! Have you never met a programmer who had ~20 years of experience but actually was extremely weak at programming? Even the most basic of interviews would disqualify them from the job, but an ML algorithm can give them huge points on the "experience" alone.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>No, of course not. Symmetrically, the should also not automatically accepted as true. This. I imagine most are absolutely true, but there are some that absolutely are not. I've personally been accused by rape, online, of someone in another state that I've never even been to. Fortunately, no one took the claim serious but I imagine there are many innocent people that have been wrongly accused for whatever reason. I a…
I imagine most are absolutely true, I don't, for two reasons. (1) There is simply no agreement currently on what counts as harassment. (2) Anecdote: I've been involved in investigating a sexual harassment claim at a previous employer, at it was absolutely and categorically and provably false. turning into McCarthyism. Too late. That ship has sailed a long time ago. The situation has gotten so out of hand, that record…
This is an absolutely fair observation.
>The situation has gotten so out of hand, that recording all employee interaction might indeed be the only way forward.
Yeah, I think something like bodycams is likely the most effective solution to the issue but then things get tricky for various industries, stuff like patient/client confidentiality laws, trade secrets, etc. Not to mention stuff like using the restroom, where sexual harassment could still take place.
Then audio-only wouldn't cover miming explicit actions.
It's certainly a problem with no easily actionable answer.
"A commitment to end pay and opportunity inequity"? I'm confused here. Are they demanding that preferential hiring and advancement practices and programs for women and certain minorities be stopped?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Of course! Have you never met a programmer who had ~20 years of experience but actually was extremely weak at programming? Even the most basic of interviews would disqualify them from the job, but an ML algorithm can give them huge points on the "experience" alone.
I too have encountered developers with many years of experience and little programming skill. But in those cases I'd not hire them; or if they made it through the net I'd put them on a performance improvement plan and begin the process of firing them.
Wouldn't it be easier to create an algorithm for compensation which clearly didn't involve gender (i.e. no deep learning stuff). Something which boils down to base salary + experience factor + google service factor. Honestly, I can imagine that being less troublesome even outside of attempting to be fair an equitable regardless of race / gender / sexual orientation.
Blind hiring can have the exact opposite effect: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-30/bilnd-recruitment-tri... My point is - there's zero guarantee that a "logical" algorithm would be "fair". Just like if you trained an ML algorithm on the database of people currently in American prisons it would most likely conclude that black=more likely to be a criminal, which is obviously an unfair assumption to make.