[diob]

It's strange to say it might be biased. Bias is absolutely impossible to avoid, especially with how today's "AI" works.

You might be able to avoid it with a panel of AI, similar to how we try to avoid it by using panels of humans, but even that turns out to be contentious and not surefire.

I have feeling with AI it'll be even worse, since folks / companies can pass the buck (similar to how health insurance companies are now using it to deny folks).

[tbrownaw]

> * Bias is absolutely impossible to avoid, especially with how today's "AI" works.*

Unless you're taking the "there are multiple mathematically incompatible ways to define bias" view of the topic, just do what's already known best practice for high-bureaucracy human review. Which is too define an overly-pedantic standard rubric.

[kcexn]

Everyone knows there is bias. The problem this article highlights is that by delegating screening and human judgment to a few AI vendors those vendors will bias all employers in the same way.