"They also found that participating firms attached less importance to interrupted work histories or other negative signals for minority candidates. This suggests that anonymizing resumes may have made it more difficult for employers that were originally more favorable to minority candidates, to identify these candidates, and to assess their application in light of the adverse employment conditions many of them face."
That makes sense. It's sort of like how I wouldn't expect someone from Kentucky to have the same internship opportunities as someone from the bay area, but if I cant see their location then all I have to go off of is the listed experience.
"if an employer wants to not hire you because of your race/gender/nationality etc, it can do it anyway in a later stage"
First, you're increasing the probability of discrimination by making it possible earlier on. The number of people that could exclude you goes up; e.g. the initial, possibly external, recruiter (who is screening hundreds of candidates) who would never otherwise have seen your face, can now discriminate on appearance.
Secondly, people are less discriminatory to people they've actually met and gotten to know somewhat. A picture of an anonymous person, with very little other information to go off of, may affect someone's judgement quite strongly; whereas, when you actually meet and talk with someone, have a lot of other information about them, and they are no longer anonymous, physical appearance will have less influence.
I interviewed with them for a few different positions and worked for them once. Do not recommend. A toxic 'shark tank' like workplace culture and very middling salary.
"Even 4x2 hour interviews is still only the equivalent of a single workday."
So about $400 of labor?
Neither the prospective employee or employer get a good 'feel' of each other because both are giving 'performances' in a completely different context than actual work.
No one has any real, statistically valid and logically sound, data on hiring practices. It's all dogma & "intuition".
Yes, agreed. And animals literally take O2 out and put CO2 into the atmosphere. There's, more or less a balance there. However, we as humans, have been dumping excessive amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere as part of our industry, wildly throwing that balance off; if we find a way to further our industry by taking CO2 out... then I can imagine the balance swinging wildly in the opposite direction.
> The lowest median rent in the US is $725 a month in West Virginia and the internet access is not great
I'll note this is not correct. I'm in Morgantown WV and the Internet is great. I'm paying in the low $30s for 200mbps with normal low latency and it's highly reliable, via Comcast. That'll go on up to 1.2gbps if I need it. Speedtest usually comes out to 180-230mbps depending on the test site.
Most populated areas of West Virginia offer typical Comcast-style Internet speeds and prices. If you're living in the middle of nowhere, or a town of 2000 people, it's true that may be a different story. Starlink and local cable providers are your only serious options then.
Do you by any chance know how it breaks down across different types of housing? Studio vs 1-bedroom vs 2-bedroom, townhouse vs single-family, etc? Any websites to find this kind of data that you'd recommend?
you kind of answered your own question with the next to paragraphs. Other car manufacturers don't call their adaptive cruise control 'autopilot' or 'full self driving'.
That makes sense. It's sort of like how I wouldn't expect someone from Kentucky to have the same internship opportunities as someone from the bay area, but if I cant see their location then all I have to go off of is the listed experience.