Amazon scraps secret AI recruiting tool that showed bias against women
“Everyone wanted this holy grail,” one of the people said. “They literally wanted it to be an engine where I’m going to give you 100 resumes, it will spit out the top five, and we’ll hire those.”
In effect, Amazon’s system taught itself that male candidates were preferable. It penalized resumes that included the word “women’s,” as in “women’s chess club captain.” And it downgraded graduates of two all-women’s colleges, according to people familiar with the matter. They did not specify the names of the schools.
Amazon edited the programs to make them neutral to these particular terms. But that was no guarantee that the machines would not devise other ways of sorting candidates that could prove discriminatory, the people said.
I think there are very real problems with the Western notion of egalitarianism. Since Western propaganda is so effective at banning people from discussing differences in race, gender, physical size and strength, intelligence, and so forth, people on the political left seem incapable of having intelligent discussions about topics like this. Yet, computers do not care about political correctness, and it seems they are capable of making the same generalizations that people can make.
For those who take Western egalitarianism so seriously, they need to be much more alert to the dangers of AI, including the dangers of sorting people ordinally. I have little doubt that an AI engine that could detect race, sex, etc., even by inference, would be racist, sexist, etc. Amazon's AI engine did exactly that, and Amazon elected to discontinue it.
What will happen if companies don't discontinue it? If they make decisions based upon AI, can they make a legally defensible claim that they weren't making hiring decisions based upon race, sex or other criteria?
"...the capital gains tax should be at ... 39.6 percent instead of 20 percent,"
"We choose truth over facts!"
-- Joe Biden