2 ms·
>It's possible that the population of good Java programmers is unusually tall because of some biological factor, but this idea needs some major justification be
by ThrustVectoring 9y ago
>It's possible that the population of good Java programmers is unusually tall because of some biological factor, but this idea needs some major justification before you use it to make decisions.
But "we're somehow secretly and unknowingly discriminating in our hiring process" doesn't need such justification before using it to make decisions?
- mikeash 9y agoCorrect, because bias is prevalent and almost impossible to avoid. For example: does any part of your interview involve a subjective evaluation? If so, do any of the evaluators know the candidates' names? If so, congratulations, your process is probably biased! http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/mar/15/jalen-ross/black-name-resume-50-percent-less-likely-get-respo/ http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/mar/15/... That's literally all it takes: some human judgment and some way to guess at the applicant's race. The discrimination can happen subconsciously. You and I would probably fall victim to it despite our best intentions. Since the manifesto we're discussing is mostly about gender, it's worth mentioning that the same thing happens there: http://m.pnas.org/content/109/41/16474.abstract http://m.pnas.org/content/109/41/16474.abstract Nobody knows how to screen job applicants for pure merit without bias. If it's a choice between "our process is imperfect just like everybody else's" and "we stumbled upon the perfect unbiased screening process and all bias in the output is due to inherent variation in the population," bet on the first one every time. It's about a million times more likely.