> The aim of the AI is to “mechanize the search for talent”. It doesn’t care to, nor have any means to, make decisions “like the recruiters did”.
This is why AI is so confusing. All "AI" does is rapidly accelerate human decisions by not involving them, so that speed and consistency are guaranteed. They are not replacements for human decision making, they are replacements for human decision making at scale.
If we can't figure out how to do unbiased interviews at the individual level, then AI will never solve this problem. Anyone that tells you otherwise is selling you snake oil.
> If we can't figure out how to do unbiased interviews at the individual level, then AI will never solve this problem. Anyone that tells you otherwise is selling you snake oil.
I wonder to what extent people want to solve it and perhaps more importantly whether or not it can be solved at all...
This is all happening before the interview, even. The AI, as far as I can see from the article, was just sorting resumes into accept/reject piles, based on the kinds of resumes that led to hire/pass results in the hands of humans.
This is why AI is so confusing. All "AI" does is rapidly accelerate human decisions by not involving them, so that speed and consistency are guaranteed. They are not replacements for human decision making, they are replacements for human decision making at scale.
If we can't figure out how to do unbiased interviews at the individual level, then AI will never solve this problem. Anyone that tells you otherwise is selling you snake oil.