291–300 of 323 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Looks like Hire Right ( https://www.hireright.com/ ) uses this. And a lot of the FANG tier companies use Hire Right. That'd a exclude a lot of the tech companies.
Just to add, when I was interviewing at my current company (FANG), hireright has the nerve to call my THEN employer and try to verify my salary information! I
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think so. There are valid use cases for sentiment analysis, but you need to understand the limitations of your training data and probably still want humans to QC at least some representative proportion of flagged posts, if you're going to do this legitimately. Of course a company like this just wants to sell any garbage they can dig up.
Well, I will admit that I am quite ignorant of what exactly a background check is, but I just don't see how such a morally fraught question can be legally allowed to be decided by anyone else than a psychologist. In fact, considering the moral hazard, I don't even see how even using an AI, even as simple as "grep", helping that psychologist in the cost-minimization contexts of a private company would not result in an…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's basically an algorithmic filter for wokism. A lot of innovative people tend to be unswayed by our strange moral fads. Seems like talent is being left on the table. Good news for startups.
Not really “for wokism” - some of the tweets captured are “woke” but still flagged for the language used. As one reply pointed out “fuck racism” would get flagged. It seems like it’s more just scanning for expressions of opinion, good or bad. “I like alcohol” - flagged bad. “I love charity” - flagged good. So these can be used by employers to determine “culture fit” which (opinion here) will probably largely be used,…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s abusive when it’s used as it was here to imply that it’s the worker’s fault for accepting bad working conditions, as if there aren’t many well documented reasons why that’s hard for most people.
https://sneak.berlin/20191201/american-communication/ I made no such implication. You appear to be reading something I simply did not say.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Who’s responsible for you being a single parent with limited skills? The corporation?
Personal responsibility is obviously something that should be encouraged. To employ it as a scapegoat in order to avoid social change is not. A world in which some classes of people find it hard to freely choose their employer is one in which the free market will not work.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do 80% of people get into car crashes or hurt on the job every year? No? Then my advice can apply to 80% of the people.
Try repeating this assertion after getting into a car crash yourself
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If my personal issues demanded that people use special pronouns around me in order to protect my own self identity, I think that I would eventually be more self-conscious about the fact that the majority of people in my office are now most likely making fun of me behind my back and calling me whatever they want when I'm not around... Don't people just avoid using pronouns altogether for you though if they feel so opp…
Why would people make fun of them behind their back?
You don't have to look very far - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbT2sQ1GmgY
Oy. Similarly, I'm mystified with the CIA's and NSA's fascination with mandatory recurring polygraph tests. It's pretty well known the whole area is flawed bullshit. It doesn't measure anything remotely related to "truth". Edit: I know we aren't supposed to discuss downvotes here, but the activity on this comment and my replies are very interesting. It's curious why discussion on this topic is so controversial. Why w…
I think the polygraph is really just an additional tool to aid the main goal, which is to interrogate the participant. To this end the polygraph is a useful tool as it provides added discomfort, which can help the interrogator get answers from the participant.
Reminds me of one of my favorite scenes from The Wire, Bunk using his bag of tricks to get someone to talk. Whole thing is hilarious, but the lie detector stuff starts here:
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If keeping racists around was so good for business, then business culture would not have drastically changed in the last 50 or 60 years. As far as US being #1 economy, that generally happens when the rest of the developed world is in rubble (post WWII). Men being sexist and racist was not necessarily a contributor. Another trend was more people smoked cigarettes. Do you thinking smoking cigarettes means a more effect…
> If keeping racists around was so good for business Nobody said it was "good". What was said, to quote, is: "So, maybe personal opinions of that nature are not related to being a good developer or a good car mechanic or hair dresser" -- in other words, that it was not really a contributor (pro or con). > Another trend was more people smoked cigarettes. Do you thinking smoking cigarettes means a more effective busine…
You can't know that. The fact businesses almost universally moved to eliminate these tendencies speaks to some evidence that it was to their detriment.
And as far as I know, smokers are not being penalized in the work place, despite taking more breaks than non smokers.