Submitted 2 days ago by Allah@infosec.pub to technology@lemmy.world
https://www.piratewires.com/p/ai-shows-bias-against-men-in-hiring-study-finds
LLMs reproducing stereotypes is a well researched topic. They do that due to what they are. Stereotypes and bias in (in the training data), bias and stereotypes out. That's what they're meant to do. And all AI companies have entire departments to tune that, measure the biases and then fine-tune it to whatever they deem fit.
I mean the issue aren't women or anything, it's using AI for hiring in the first place. You do that if you want whatever stereotypes Anthropic and OpenAI gave to you.
Just pattern recognition in the end, and extrapolating from that sample size.
Issue is they probably want to pattern-recognize something like merit / ability / competence here. And ignore other factors. Which is just hard to do.
What the fuck did I just read?
ah, mamdani the guy who dehumanized hindus
That article has a lot of reaching between the proof it claims and its conclusion.
OP India is right wing garbage and I’m ashamed I ever got featured in their garbage website, once upon a time.
Would be cool if the Technology community found literally any other topic to discuss beyond AI. I’m really over it, and I don’t care.
I don’t care what bias they do and don’t have ; if you use an LLM to select résumés, you don’t deserve to hire me. I make my résumé illegible for LLMs on purpose.
( But don’t follow my advice. I don’t actually need a job so I can pull this kinda nonsense and be selective, most people probably can’t )
How do you make it illegible for LLMs?
You write a creative series of deeply offensive curse words in small white on white print.
and their companies are biased against humans in hiring.
Even before LLMs, resumes were processed through keyword filters already. You have to optimize your resume for keyword readers, which should work for LLMs as well.
I use the ARCI model to describe my roles.
these systems cannot run a lemonade stand without shitting their balls
So they admit, that there’s a huge bias against women, black people, …
And then they claim it must be a bias against men. Maybe it’s not a bias, maybe it’s the interpretation of studies which found out that there are certain areas where women are better in their jobs than men, and the AI considered those studies despite the bias against women.
Leadership & Management
Study: Harvard Business Review (2019) Finding: Women scored higher than men in 12 out of 16 leadership competencies.
hbr.org/…/research-women-score-higher-than-men-in…
Medicine
Study 1: JAMA Internal Medicine (2017) Finding: Patients treated by female doctors had lower mortality rates.
jamanetwork.com/journals/…/2593255
Stdy 2: Annals of Internal Medicine (2024, UCLA) Funding: Female patients treated by female doctors had 8.15% mortality vs 8.38% with male doctors (2016–2019 data)
uclahealth.org/…/treatment-female-doctors-leads-l…
Sales Performance
Source: Xactly Insights (2017) Finding: 86% of women met their sales quotas, vs. 78% of men.
forbes.com/…/women-in-sales-beating-the-numbers/
Education / Teaching
Source: OECD TALIS Survey Finding: Female teachers report better classroom climate and higher student engagement.
Handpicks poor ‘studies’ to justify personal belief that women are better.
Handpicked poor study… What do you think this whole post is?
At least where I'm from it's pretty well known that girls outperform boys in school, probably because their brains develop slightly faster in some ways useful to perform in a class room.
This could give women a head start and very well lead to them on average performing better in work life, until they are forced to choose between careers and families while they partners continue to advance their careers at full speed not worrying about being pregnant.
But that's a different discussion. We should avoid biases in hiring because biases suck and make for an unjust society. And we should stop pretending language models make intelligent considerations about anything.
What's fascinating here is that LLMs trained on the texts we produce create the opposite bias of what we observe in society, where men tend to get preferential treatment. My guess is that this is a consequence of inclusive language. In my writibg, whenever women are under-represented, I make a point out of defaulting to she and her rather than her and him. I know others do the same. I imagine this could feed into LLMs. Whatever it is that causes this, it sure as fuck isn't anything actually intelligent.
the AI considered
Sorry to break it to you, but the "AI" does not "consider" anything. They are talking about a language prediction model.
the problematic part of this is that you’ve stripped all context to support your, admittedly bigoted, rhetoric and ethos.
black people, generally, have worse education outcomes than whites in american education. you’d still be an incredibly shitty and terrible person if you advocated hiring white people over black people by wrote rule. you can find plenty of “studies” that formalize that argument just as you have here, though.
no, i think most rational people understand that in a scenario like this all people have, on average, the same basic cognitive faculties and potential, and would then proceed to advocate for improving the educational conditions for groups that are falling behind not due to their own nature, but due to the system they are in.
but idk, i’m not a bigot so maybe my brain just implicitly rejects the idea “X people are worse/less intelligent/etc than Y people”
fucking think about what you’re saying. there is no “right people” to hate other than the rich and powerful. it isn’t a subversion of the feminist message to admit this. in fact, it makes you a better feminist. real feminist aren’t sexist.
This isn’t exactly a comprehensive literature review, and totally misunderstands what a LLM is and does
Right. If it's true that women statistically outperform men (with same application documents), it'd be logical to prefer them just on gender alone. Because they likely turn out to be better.
Thanks for the voice of reason in this sea of hate.
From my pov it would be best to have completely anonymised applications and no involvement of AI in the hiring process.
They’re as biased as the data they were trained on. If that data leaned toward male applicants, then yeah, it makes complete sense.
Only half kidding now… the way ethics get extrapolated by today’s moral perfection police, this must mean anti-AI = misogynist.
So we can use Trump’s own anti-DEI bullshit to kill off LLMs now?
Well, ya see, trump isnt racist against computers
Bias was baked in via RLHF and also existed in the datasets used for training. Reddit cancer grows
technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 day ago
I dunno why people even care about this bullshit pseudo-science. The study is dumb AF. They didn’t even use real resumes. They had an LLM generate resumes. It’s all phony smoke and mirrors. The usual “AI” grift.
kozy138@slrpnk.net 1 day ago
I feel as though generating these “fake” resumes is one of the top uses for LLMs. Millions of people are probably using LLMs to write their own resumes, so generating random ones seems on par with reality.