this post was submitted on 27 Nov 2024
329 points (98.8% liked)

Mildly Infuriating

35595 readers
460 users here now

Home to all things "Mildly Infuriating" Not infuriating, not enraging. Mildly Infuriating. All posts should reflect that.

I want my day mildly ruined, not completely ruined. Please remember to refrain from reposting old content. If you post a post from reddit it is good practice to include a link and credit the OP. I'm not about stealing content!

It's just good to get something in this website for casual viewing whilst refreshing original content is added overtime.


Rules:

1. Be Respectful


Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...


2. No Illegal Content


Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means: -No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...


3. No Spam


Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...


4. No Porn/ExplicitContent


-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...


5. No Enciting Harassment,Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts


-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...


6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.


-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

...


7. Content should match the theme of this community.


-Content should be Mildly infuriating.

-At this time we permit content that is infuriating until an infuriating community is made available.

...


8. Reposting of Reddit content is permitted, try to credit the OC.


-Please consider crediting the OC when reposting content. A name of the user or a link to the original post is sufficient.

...

...


Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Lemmy Review

2.Lemmy Be Wholesome

3.Lemmy Shitpost

4.No Stupid Questions

5.You Should Know

6.Credible Defense


Reach out to LillianVS for inclusion on the sidebar.

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Why do you think an AI is in the position to know what makes a qualified individual? It probably rejects every resume it views as not fitting its standard template. Wanting to hire the next Einstein? Well too bad, he's neurodivergent and he doesn't write a resume the way the AI wants him to. Also, he has an "ethnic" name so that's an automatic rejection.

[–] zarkanian@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 hours ago

HR systems are already doing this before AI.

[–] scarabic@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Do you think there’s enough information in the application to decide? If that information is there, then you shouldn’t categorically assume AI is being racist against Einstein. Personal review of resumes is notoriously rife with bias - you actually might want to consider that AI could be an improvement. The guy with the ethnic name might get a high AI score and actually get a second look. You don’t know the AI performs worse than humans in the things you care about. Be real: you have no information about that at all.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Believe it or not, we already know a lot of information about this issue. It's just that no one gives a shit.

https://www.washington.edu/news/2024/10/31/ai-bias-resume-screening-race-gender/

You clearly don't or you would have looked it up first.

[–] scarabic@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Any comparison with how humans do with the same resumes in that article? Hm… nope.

The AI models are racist because they are trained on racist human generated decision sets. At least AI can be reprogrammed. Your own article concludes that this research should be used to improve AI.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Your own article concludes that this research should be used to improve AI.

What did I say above?

Believe it or not, we already know a lot of information about this issue. It’s just that no one gives a shit.

But I'm not sure why you think "less racist than a racist human but still racist" as the current status quo is acceptable.

[–] scarabic@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Nice attempt to put those words in my mouth. Here’s what I think less racist than a human is: less racist than a human.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world -1 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Either it's acceptable, which is why you're defending it, or it's not acceptable, in which case you have no reason to defend it.

I'm assuming you're not just saying things in order to practice your typing, so all I can think is that you think "less racist than a human but still racist" as the status quo is acceptable.

But if you don't think it's acceptable, please explain why you're defending it.

[–] scarabic@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

Yeah you just keep on making assumptions about what I’m saying. You won’t be happy until I’m wearing a KKK hood and waving a torch so you can shoot me.

Your hostile, continued pigeonholing and insistence on strictly defining the responses I’m allowed to give does not inspire me to continue further discussion with you. You are stuck on your narrative and will bend anything I say around it. Not interested.

[–] WhyFlip@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

There's no template that is looked for in my company's case. And it's not black and white, accept/reject, rather it's trained to score applicants on a predefined set of criteria set by my company. It's used as a tool to basically sort the resumes from strongest to weakest, most applicable to least. Depending on how many resumes are received, all of them might still be reviewed by a human. We don't and never have used a candidate's name at any point in the review process.

"Neurodivergent" had to have been a front runner for 2024 word of the year.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago (2 children)

“Neurodivergent” had to have been a front runner for 2024 word of the year.

Are you suggesting that autism and ADHD are not real conditions?

[–] scarabic@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Do you seriously believe that human review of a neurodivergent person’s strangely composed resume is going to be any better? Have you ever sat down with a stack of resumes in your life? Managers will toss them in seconds without even reading them in full - at least AI will do that.

I think you’re just using neurodivergence as a way to take your miserably uninformed assumptions about how AI application review works, and legitimize them as a discrimination issue.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world -1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You didn't answer my question.

[–] scarabic@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

ADHD and Autism are real conditions.

Now answer every point I made.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I seriously believe a human can view a non-standard resume and make a better judgment about it than a machine. And yes, I have sat down with a stack of resumes. I used to own my own company. That's exactly how I know someone with a resume that doesn't fit the traditional template an AI might care about, especially if they have a flair for design, would get my attention as a good candidate.

I also wouldn't care if their name was Shonda or Muhammad. AIs, on the other hand, reject people with "ethnic" names.

Happy now?

[–] WhyFlip@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

What is this "traditional template" you keep referring to?

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Are you serious? You've never seen resume templates?

Just Google the phrase "resume template" to see lots of them.

What do you think AI is trained on when trained to look at resumes? How do you think it decides what is a good resume and a bad resume? Do you think it uses its reasoning abilities?

Also: "Thanks for answering my questions." You're welcome.

[–] WhyFlip@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

At my company, they are not trained on templates, as I already mentioned.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

How exactly does your AI decide what is a good resume and what is a bad resume?

[–] WhyFlip@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Resumes are scored based on predefined criteria set by my company.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 2 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Can you please be like 5000% less vague?

Because now it sounds like you're evading and that the AI is as bad as I am suggesting.

[–] WhyFlip@lemmy.world -1 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (1 children)

Yeah, our matching algorithms are proprietary, so no.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago

Then I have no reason to believe your claims. You could easily just be lying.

[–] WhyFlip@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Not even sure why you'd even ask this as I never said any such thing. Of course ADHD and autism are real conditions.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I quoted why I asked it. It sure sounds like you're saying it's just a meaningless buzzword.

[–] WhyFlip@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Inferring is not the same as assuming.