https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/03/technology/facebook-ai-ra...
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/03/technology/facebook-ai-ra...
The sage wisdom from the ILM professor was essentially to avoid pissing off rejected candidates by not interviewing them, as interviewing is a signal that the employees are qualified.
That’s pretty fucked up, when you think about what that means from a practical perspective. You’re either interviewing people who are unqualified (some of whom will get positions due to circumstances) or turn selection of candidates over to a star chamber.
Sounds great for morale. Lol.
It makes sense, if the candidate is interviewed + rejected they know there is no upward mobility for them in the company. The next logical step is to look for employment elsewhere that may offer upward mobility.
I'd be in favor of something like this. Why should the criminal justice system and every tax payer be on the hook for protecting these big companies from the consequences of their bug-ridden software?
Deleted Comment
But the 4th Amendment would cover Apple being forced to modify their system to scan for anything else the Government has told them to.
1. It can handle up to 650 Mbit if you use firewalling with iptables
2. You only need one (1) interface if you use VLANS.