4 ms·
>Can you cite a tech company with more than 20 employees that uses voice changers in interviews? No, I cannot. It seems that despite the big conversation abou
by ShredKazoo 4y ago
>Can you cite a tech company with more than 20 employees that uses voice changers in interviews?
No, I cannot. It seems that despite the big conversation about diversity in tech, people aren't very interested in practical solutions to reducing discrimination.
It comes down to the point I made about helping people vs ideological purification. Many people prefer the latter. This is the sort of left-wing extremism I referred to earlier.
To be honest, I think the main reason companies don't use voice changers is if they do, the ideological purifier types will go after them. Just in this thread you can see how upset you and DrewADesign got, after I suggested the idea.
>the idea that you can correct for ethnicity with a voice changer
If it can work for gender, why can't it work for race?
- dragonwriter 4y ago> If it can work for gender, why can't it work for race? Because pitch/tone is different than ethnolect, and voice changers can obscure differences of the first but not the second.
- ShredKazoo 4y agoWomen and men also use language differently. I doubt this is a big issue in practice -- you could mask the ethnolect using AI.
- dragonwriter 4y ago> Women and men also use language differently Not as significantly. > I doubt this is a big issue in practice It absolutely is. > you could mask the ethnolect using AI. That’s not just a “voice changer”, and if you are going beyond pronunciation to alter grammar and vocabulary that is ethnically identifying, with even modern AI, you have a non-negligible chance of occasionally whiffing and radically altering semantics.
- tptacek 4y agoAlso worth pointing out that this ethno-masking AI is a service that, so far as I know, does not currently exist. Which makes citing it a particularly weak response to the studies that show candidates with identifiably Black ethnicity do poorly compared to white-coded candidates with identical backgrounds.
- dragonwriter 4y agoThere does seem to be a bit of conflating “this is an idea which might have potential and be worth investment in researching and developing” with “this is an alternative which actually exists, and if there was any concern people would just use it”.
- ShredKazoo 4y agoI only meant to make the first claim, FWIW. The idea was suggested in response to someone who implied I favored "deliberately avoiding intervention". I mentioned the idea to clarify my position, and give an example of the sort of intervention I'd be in favor of. If someone turns it into a product, they deserve mega kudos as far as I'm concerned.
- tptacek 4y agoLets not forget that you changed the framing on this discussion, from (paraphrased) "there is evidence that race-based preferences are widespread in hiring, suggesting that we should take seriously the idea of race-specific privileges and disadvantages among candidates", to your preferred discussion of "is it possible to engineer a system that would prevent hiring managers from knowing the race of applicants".
- tptacek 4y agoHow "upset" I got?
- ShredKazoo 4y agoHere's a user telling me I'm "desperate to assuage and protect racist beliefs" because (a) I said we should avoid methods that backfire, and (b) I suggested a practical idea for reduction of racial discrimination in hiring: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34226817 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34226817
- tptacek 4y agoWhat does that have to do with the question I just asked you? Can you just answer it directly?
- heavyset_go 4y agoYou're confusing me with the poster you're responding to.