| >Changing hiring practices does not mean they are improve. No, but I'd like to at least see conversation on how to improve the process. We aren't even at that point. We're just barely past acknowledging that it's even an issue. >but if you change processes them now you don't have baselines and past experiences to guide you. I argue we're already at this point. The reason we got past the above point of "acknowledging problem" (a decade too late, arguably) is that the baselines are failing to new technology, which is increasing false positives. You have a point, but why does tech pick this point to finally decide not to "move fast and break things"? Not when it comes to law and ethics, but for aquiring new talent (which meanwhile is already disrupting heir teams with this AI slop?) >those will be systematic errors which are downplayed by the fact that your whole organization is proof that your hiring practices are effective. okay, so back to step zero then. Do we have a hiring problem? The thesis of this article says yes. "it worked before" seems to be the antipattern the tech industry tried to fight back against for decades. |
The current hiring practices are a result of acknowledging what they did before didn't work. The current ones work well enough that people don't wanna change it, the only ones who wanna change it are engineers not the companies.