Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Hacking attractiveness biases in hiring? The role of beautifying photo-filters

emerald.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 279 posts

Re: Hacking attractiveness biases in hiring? The role of beautifying photo-filters

#221

Post by sokoloff »

leereeves wrote: post #98
dragonwriter wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is why I dislike the idea of protected groups. Some people do seem to think that the existence of protected groups means it's ok to discriminate against anyone who isn't protected. In law, for private parties, that is expressly the case. Absent protected classes people could, and with them they still can outside of them, differentiate treatment on any basis they choose. For government action under US Constitut…

And every group that is now protected was once not protected. Were, say, the actions taken against Alan Turing acceptable simply because they were legal at the time? I must say, I'm surprised to see you defending prejudice. From what I've read of your posts here over the years, I thought you were against such things.

I don’t read anything in GP’s text as defending prejudice, but rather as expressing the reality that judgment (not pre-judgment) is both legal and widely practiced (and frequently helpful or essential in interactions).

If I’m hiring for a programming opening, the entire (and proper) purpose of interviewing is to discriminate against people who can’t or won’t be effective programmers.

Being “not an effective programmer” is not a protected class and discriminating against them is fine when hiring programmers.

“But, but, but that’s not discrimination!” Yes, it most certainly is in the “recognition and understanding of the difference between one thing and another” sense, and is very likely what GP meant when they wrote:

> Essentially every non-random decision affecting treatment of people discriminates on some basis.

Re: Hacking attractiveness biases in hiring? The role of beautifying photo-filters

#222

Post by TheAceOfHearts »

xiphias2 wrote: post #107
elptacek wrote: post #52

And there it is, the one thing I can never have an honest conversation about. The rules are different for ugly people, based on my personal experience as one data point. We're the last lot that everyone can discriminate against, or abuse, and get away with it.

Old people are in the same group, though age is definitely related to unattractiveness. With many sick people, it's also impossible not to discriminate (although that also correlates heavily to getting old).

Discriminating by age isn't always unreasonable. It's useful to have different generational perspectives in many areas. For example, I think it's a serious issue that the average age of public servants in Congress is so advanced.

The older generations are responsible for training and passing the torch onto the younger generations. The older generation can't keep clinging onto power until they die off.

Re: Hacking attractiveness biases in hiring? The role of beautifying photo-filters

#223

Post by dustymcp »

JCharante wrote: post #213
turing_complete wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am living in a country where photos on a resume are the norm and for me it is the other way round. I am interviewing a lot of people at the moment and having a picture with the resume really helps thinking of the applicant as a human being, rather than just a character sheet with skills and abilities. It also helps to remember and associate resumes, it's easier to relate a portrait to a set of skills and a CV than…

In a merit based process shouldn't applicants be thought of as just character sheets?

It should be, but humans are humans.

Re: Hacking attractiveness biases in hiring? The role of beautifying photo-filters

#224

Post by turing_complete »

aulin wrote: post #215
turing_complete wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Putting physical fitness in the same bucket as height, gender, and race is a category error. Whether someone is fit or obese tells you a lot about their lifestyle and daily choices. You cannot change your facial structure or tallness (yet), but fitness is definitely a signal for discipline and mental strength.

No it doesn't, there are plenty of disorders both physical and mental that can lead you to get overweight. There are plenty of people that are naturally fit without any effort. It says nothing about your ability to successfully accomplish a job. It's just another discriminating bias.

It's statistical inference. That is what you do when you meet somebody or conduct a job interview. We are not all-knowing beings. The overwhelming majority are overweight because their diet is poor and because they move very little. It's not rocket science.

Re: Hacking attractiveness biases in hiring? The role of beautifying photo-filters

#225

Post by turing_complete »

Broken_Hippo wrote: post #201
turing_complete wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Putting physical fitness in the same bucket as height, gender, and race is a category error. Whether someone is fit or obese tells you a lot about their lifestyle and daily choices. You cannot change your facial structure or tallness (yet), but fitness is definitely a signal for discipline and mental strength.

...but fitness is definitely a signal for discipline and mental strength No, it doesn't. Not being fit merely tells you that they might have lifestyle choices different from your own. Or they might be female with PCOS. Or they might have a disease that causes fatigue or pain when they exercise. Heck, that might be the very reason for their desk job. Or a history of food insecurity and really need the insurance the jo…

Thanks, it is not absolute certainty, it is, as I said, a "signal": It's about statistical inference. That is what you do when you meet somebody or conduct a job interview. We are not all-knowing beings. The overwhelming majority are overweight because their diet is poor and because they move very little. It's not rocket science.

Re: Hacking attractiveness biases in hiring? The role of beautifying photo-filters

#226

Post by rramadass »

Attractiveness is definitely a factor which subconsciously influences Hiring. Fair or Unfair that is life and we have to deal with it.

I have heard that Google tries to control for this by having one panel of people as the Interviewers (i.e. actually meet/talk to the Interviewee) who then write-up their respective reports. This set of reports are then submitted to another panel (who have NOT met/talked to the Interviewee) who then have to make a hiring decision based solely on the reports.

Re: Hacking attractiveness biases in hiring? The role of beautifying photo-filters

#227

Post by Broken_Hippo »

turing_complete wrote: post #225
Broken_Hippo wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...but fitness is definitely a signal for discipline and mental strength No, it doesn't. Not being fit merely tells you that they might have lifestyle choices different from your own. Or they might be female with PCOS. Or they might have a disease that causes fatigue or pain when they exercise. Heck, that might be the very reason for their desk job. Or a history of food insecurity and really need the insurance the jo…

Thanks, it is not absolute certainty, it is, as I said, a "signal": It's about statistical inference. That is what you do when you meet somebody or conduct a job interview. We are not all-knowing beings. The overwhelming majority are overweight because their diet is poor and because they move very little. It's not rocket science.

You know you have this bias, though. People use the same sort of language for racism, homophobia, and such things. You can train yourself to think of exceptions to overcome some of the bias and honestly, if you are interviewing people, you should be doing so actively. It took me longer to type up the reply than to think of valid reasons this could happen to someone, after all. As you said, it isn't rocket science.

Re: Hacking attractiveness biases in hiring? The role of beautifying photo-filters

#228

Post by qayxc »

WalterBright wrote: post #123
Jensson wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe they actually have more need to prove themselves since short peoples leadership gets challenged much more often? Why else would they feel greater need to prove themselves? It isn't like short peoples brains are wired differently.

Tall and/or attractive people have lifelong advantages. There's nothing fair or just about it. We're each dealt a different set of cards, and it's up to us to take advantage of the good cards and make lemonade from the bad ones as best we can. I.e. don't confuse having an advantage or disadvantage with destiny. We make our own destinies by the choices we make.

> I.e. don't confuse having an advantage or disadvantage with destiny. We make our own destinies by the choices we make.

That's cute but very disconnected from reality.

Re: Hacking attractiveness biases in hiring? The role of beautifying photo-filters

#229

Post by jvvw »

wink wrote: post #214
prawn wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've had a few Dutch interns join me in Australia. One applicant who wasn't successful was a young woman whose CV included a few personal photos, one of which was a bit of a sultry pose straddling a chair. Not indecent, but certainly not work oriented.

I once got a cv from a developer who put an url to his homepage where he had photos of him and his girlfriend modeling underwear. Not a real problem (for me), but it's the first time I've seen someone nearly naked before I met them in person for an interview. It was certainly a little odd.

When trying to find a graphic designer once, got a portfolio from one designer mostly comprised of work for a soft porn site. It may have been professional graphic design experience but not exactly something I wanted to look at as part of my job.

Re: Hacking attractiveness biases in hiring? The role of beautifying photo-filters

#230

Post by eru »

JCharante wrote: post #213
turing_complete wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am living in a country where photos on a resume are the norm and for me it is the other way round. I am interviewing a lot of people at the moment and having a picture with the resume really helps thinking of the applicant as a human being, rather than just a character sheet with skills and abilities. It also helps to remember and associate resumes, it's easier to relate a portrait to a set of skills and a CV than…

In a merit based process shouldn't applicants be thought of as just character sheets?

Depends. Someone will have to work with those people. They don't just interact with a computer or a machine.
Post reply on HN