3 ms·

>What could justify it? The assumption that applicants from all races are on average equally qualified for every position. Whole subfields of modern academia a

>What could justify it? The assumption that applicants from all races are on average equally qualified for every position. Whole subfields of modern academia are based on that assumption.

sdellis 4mo ago
Unless you believe that Black people are racially inferior, I think this is simply evidence of racial discrimination at a systemic level, from education through employment. AI merely reenforces the systems built to favor white people.
- adammarples 4mo ago
  There are many other potential explanatory factors than your simple binary. Black people in America started in a very bad and difficult position, only a few generations ago, with huge racial discrimination, no money, and generational distrust of institutions. That is a factor that will affect what you see today without any current system of racial discrimination or inferiority.
  - sdellis 4mo ago
    If I hear you correctly, the lack of reparations toward Black people in America is more to blame for the discrepancy than systemic racism? Perhaps it could be both? I am getting downvoted because it's hard to admit that AI only reinforces the culture that it is trained on. It is the perfect technology to keep systemic racism in place, all while being the perfect scapegoat for lack of personal or corporate accountability.
    - mstewartgallus 4mo ago
      The failure of land reform in reconstruction really fucked things up a lot.
59percentmore 4mo ago
The assumption is that no one has the authority to decide that all races aren't equally qualified for every position.
- xp84 4mo ago
  "Races" aren't qualified for anything. Neither are star signs or favorite Hogwarts houses. Individuals are qualified or unqualified. If a company happens to end up with less than 1/4 Ravenclaws or not very many Virgos, it doesn't mean hate is a reason. It could be that the Ravenclaws that applied were a bit less qualified than those from the other houses. I guess my point is, doing the statistical analysis for race and gender and drawing conclusions, while being completely blind to the one single factor any sane hiring manager should be focusing on -- actual qualifications for the role -- doesn't make any sense.
  - avadodin 4mo ago
    It could make sense if one was looking to make interventions early on before the candidates reach the selection process. Don't claim AI is discriminating against non–selects, though. I doubt companies are using Gr*k to make their hiring decisions.
- Manuel_D 4mo ago
  Eliminate the double negative, and you're making the same statement as the comment above.
aenis 4mo ago
I am wondering - if in those circles, questions such as 'is NBA intentionally discriminating against asians - or is the fact that long distance running is dominated by, say, Ethiopians an example of discrimination' are ever discussed - or declared taboo and racist? I don't doubt that the assumption is just plain, demonstrably wrong - we all evolved under different types of environmental pressures - I am just wondering if the proponents of the all-the-races-are-same-on-average are ever discussing those obvious facts, and what answers do they come up with to explain the, say, unfair underrepresentation of Japanese in the NBA.

>What could justify it? The assumption that applicants from all races are on average equally qualified for every position. Whole subfields of modern academia are based on that assumption.

sdellis 4mo ago

Unless you believe that Black people are racially inferior, I think this is simply evidence of racial discrimination at a systemic level, from education through employment. AI merely reenforces the systems built to favor white people.

adammarples 4mo ago
There are many other potential explanatory factors than your simple binary. Black people in America started in a very bad and difficult position, only a few generations ago, with huge racial discrimination, no money, and generational distrust of institutions. That is a factor that will affect what you see today without any current system of racial discrimination or inferiority.
- sdellis 4mo ago
  If I hear you correctly, the lack of reparations toward Black people in America is more to blame for the discrepancy than systemic racism? Perhaps it could be both? I am getting downvoted because it's hard to admit that AI only reinforces the culture that it is trained on. It is the perfect technology to keep systemic racism in place, all while being the perfect scapegoat for lack of personal or corporate accountability.
  - mstewartgallus 4mo ago
    The failure of land reform in reconstruction really fucked things up a lot.

59percentmore 4mo ago

The assumption is that no one has the authority to decide that all races aren't equally qualified for every position.

xp84 4mo ago
"Races" aren't qualified for anything. Neither are star signs or favorite Hogwarts houses. Individuals are qualified or unqualified. If a company happens to end up with less than 1/4 Ravenclaws or not very many Virgos, it doesn't mean hate is a reason. It could be that the Ravenclaws that applied were a bit less qualified than those from the other houses. I guess my point is, doing the statistical analysis for race and gender and drawing conclusions, while being completely blind to the one single factor any sane hiring manager should be focusing on -- actual qualifications for the role -- doesn't make any sense.
- avadodin 4mo ago
  It could make sense if one was looking to make interventions early on before the candidates reach the selection process. Don't claim AI is discriminating against non–selects, though. I doubt companies are using Gr*k to make their hiring decisions.
Manuel_D 4mo ago
Eliminate the double negative, and you're making the same statement as the comment above.

aenis 4mo ago

I am wondering - if in those circles, questions such as 'is NBA intentionally discriminating against asians - or is the fact that long distance running is dominated by, say, Ethiopians an example of discrimination' are ever discussed - or declared taboo and racist? I don't doubt that the assumption is just plain, demonstrably wrong - we all evolved under different types of environmental pressures - I am just wondering if the proponents of the all-the-races-are-same-on-average are ever discussing those obvious facts, and what answers do they come up with to explain the, say, unfair underrepresentation of Japanese in the NBA.