When AI was developed to scan resumes and job histories to figure out who are the best candidates, it kept selecting only men. So the AI had to be deliberately crippled in order to consider women candidates at all.
So I'm looking forward to a future medical AI with the equivalent of three Wheatleys attached so that I can lay dying on the table while a stunning and brave trans-woman of color has his bunion looked at.
Remember when to prove there was no bias in hiring for physics a cern physicist showed a meta study that showed women with less citations were hired and promoted over men with more. He was then fired for showing that women were being treated superior and still not making up for the gender gap.
I don't remember that one, but I do remember the entire nation of Australia seeing that women were brought in for job interviews at only a 40% rate instead of 50%, so they changed their rules so gender could not be identified on resumes and cover letters, thus making things truly gender-neutral and fair... Which brought the amount of women being brought in for interviews down to 30%. At which point they quickly undid the prior rule because gender equality "wasn't fair" to women.
When AI was developed to scan resumes and job histories to figure out who are the best candidates, it kept selecting only men. So the AI had to be deliberately crippled in order to consider women candidates at all.
So I'm looking forward to a future medical AI with the equivalent of three Wheatleys attached so that I can lay dying on the table while a stunning and brave trans-woman of color has his bunion looked at.
Remember when to prove there was no bias in hiring for physics a cern physicist showed a meta study that showed women with less citations were hired and promoted over men with more. He was then fired for showing that women were being treated superior and still not making up for the gender gap.
I don't remember that one, but I do remember the entire nation of Australia seeing that women were brought in for job interviews at only a 40% rate instead of 50%, so they changed their rules so gender could not be identified on resumes and cover letters, thus making things truly gender-neutral and fair... Which brought the amount of women being brought in for interviews down to 30%. At which point they quickly undid the prior rule because gender equality "wasn't fair" to women.
Shhhhh.... "Filtered for inequitable bias".
(Likely not verbatim, but not far off what I heard this process called.)
We need to start calling it what it is, Artificial Stupidity.