Skip to content
  • Hjem
  • Seneste
  • Etiketter
  • Populære
  • Verden
  • Bruger
  • Grupper
Temaer
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Kollaps
FARVEL BIG TECH
varpie@peculiar.floristV

varpie@peculiar.florist

@varpie@peculiar.florist
About
Indlæg
1
Emner
0
Fremhævelser
0
Grupper
0
Følgere
0
Følger
0

Vis Original

Indlæg

Seneste Bedste Controversial

  • Reviewers in two groups were given identical resumes for Emily Clarke and James Clarke and told they had used AI.
    varpie@peculiar.floristV varpie@peculiar.florist

    @amydiehl Some say AI tooling is a multiplicator. Here it's just the same: the people showing doubts toward the feminine persona are just using it as an excuse to justify their inherent sexism...
    I'd be curious to see more details about the study though: who are the reviewers? How big are the sets of people they have to review? How does the use of AI affect their overall judgement, compared to their gender specific acceptance rate? I just don't understand where this 22% number comes from, but my guess is the use of AI isn't a significant factor here when correlated to gender.

    Ikke-kategoriseret
  • Log ind

  • Har du ikke en konto? Tilmeld

  • Login or register to search.
Powered by NodeBB Contributors
Graciously hosted by data.coop
  • First post
    Last post
0
  • Hjem
  • Seneste
  • Etiketter
  • Populære
  • Verden
  • Bruger
  • Grupper