Cool. Literal Nazi shit, but now with AI 😵‍💫

But what if bias was not the reason? What if your face gave genuinely useful clues about your probable performance?

I hate this so much, because spouting statistics is the number one go-to of idiot racists and other bigots trying to justify their prejudices. The whole fucking point is that judging someone’s value someone based on physical attributes outside their control, is fucking evil, and increasing the accuracy of your algorithm only makes it all the more insidious.

The Economist has never been shy to post some questionable kneejerk shit in the past, but this is approaching a low even for them. Not only do they give the concept credibility, but they’re even going out of their way to dishonestly paint it as some sort of progressive boon for the poor.

Actually, what if slavery wasn’t such a bad idea after all? Lmao they never stop trying to resurrect class warfare and gatekeeping.

This is so absurd it almost feels like it isn’t real. But indeed, the article appears when I look it up

Yeah, nothing says “this person will repay their loans” like looking at their face and nothing fucking else.

I love how you can just call it capetalismo in portuguese, capeta = devil

this should be grounds for a prison sentence. open support for Nazism shouldn’t be covered by free speech laws.

Dystopian neutrality in article.

without discriminating on grounds of protected characteristics

AI classification is trained based on supervised (the right answers are predetermined) learning. MechaHitler for the fascist nationalism’s sake, will rate Obama’s face as a poor employee, and Trump’s as the bestest employee.

Open training data sets would be subject to 1. zero competitive advantage to a model, 2. massive complaints about any specific training data.

For some jobs, psycopaths AND loyalty are desirable traits, even though they can be opposite traits. Honesty, integrity, intelligence can be desirable traits, or obstacles to desperate loyalty. My point is that if there are many traits determined by faces, much more training data is needed to detect them, and then human hiring decision based on 10 or 30 traits matching to a (impossibly unique) position, where there direct manager only cares about loyalty, without being too talented, but higher level managers might prefer a candidate with potential to replace their direct manager, but all of them care about race or pregnancy risk, and then post training based on some “illegal characteristics”.

A Gattaca situation where, everyone has easy time getting great job, and moving to a greater job, OR being shut out of all jobs, creates a self contradicting prediction on “loyalty/desperation” controlability traits. If job duties are changed to include blow job services, then surely those agreeable make a better employee, despite any facial ticks responding to suggestion.

Human silent “illegal discrimination” is not eliminated/changed, but the new capability, you can use a computer to do the interviewing, and waste more interviewees’ time at no human cost to employer is why this will be a success. A warehousing company recently looked at facial expressions to determine attention to safety, and this leads to “The AI punishments to your life will continue until you smile more.” Elysium’s automated parole incident interviews is a good overview of the dystopia.

The study claims that they analyzed participants’ labor market outcomes, that being earnings and propensity to move jobs, “among other things.”

Fun fact, did you know white men tend to get paid more than black men for the same job, with the same experience and education?

Following that logic, if we took a dataset of both black and white men, then used their labor market outcomes to judge which one would be a good fit over another, white men would have higher earnings and be recommended for a job more than black people.

Black workers are also more likely to switch jobs, one of the reasons likely being because you tend to experience higher salary growth when moving jobs every 2-3 years than when you stay with a given company, which is necessary if you’re already being paid lower wages than your white counterparts.

By this study’s methodology, that person could be deemed “unreliable” because they often switch jobs, and would then not be considered.

Essentially, this is a black box that gets to excuse management saying “fuck all black people, we only want to hire whites” while sounding all smart and fancy.

I’m not sure we’re going to make it y’all.

Bringing back racism and good vibes under “scientific principle.”

I remember when stuff like this was used to show how dystopian china is.

“If he’s black, get him out of here”

This fascist wave is really bringing out all the cockroaches in our society. It’s a good thing you can’t erase anything on the internet, as this type of evidence will probably be useful in the future.

You’d better get in on a crypto grift, Kelly Shue of the Yale School of Management. I suspect you’ll have a hard time finding work within the next 1-3 years.

FYI, it’s not a paper, it’s a blog post from well connected and presumably highly educated people benefiting from the institutional prestige to see their poorly conducted study be propagated ad eternum without a modicum of relevant peer review.

edit: After a few more minutes, it’s an unreliable psychopath detector.