[patates]

> algorithms used to scan CVs

so "5 clever if statements" (which most CV parsers are, if that wasn't clear) too are subject to extra scrutiny depending on application being labeled high risk or not.

I'm not sure how to feel about this. I feel it's good intentions but marketed wrong.

Why not just say, we will evaluate critical software like we evaluate other critical engineering projects/infrastructure? Why mix in AI?

[AstralStorm]

What does it mean "like other critical projects"?

Do you mean like buildings or lawyers? Certified AI architecture now? Nobody even knows what such process would entail!

The biggest hole is that the AI or statistical systems are not explainable. When push comes to shove, their reasoning is a black hole. Any such system, whether ran by people or automatic, is instant corruption and inequity magnet.

5 if statements are explainable and subject to proper scrutiny.

[navaati]

> 5 if statements are explainable and subject to proper scrutiny.

Except when they are secret. I will never know why my CV got sent to /dev/null that day, was I missing the right keyword for the fourth if ? For me the 5 ifs are as much a blackbox as an advanced neural network.