> As I read it, the industries were grouped into three categories. “Least discriminatory” was at 3%.
The least single industry was 3%. And each single industry is a very noisy data point, based on a couple companies and needing more data points. By the time you aggregate into more solid data, like those bigger categories, it's more than 3%.
But the whole thing could use better methods and more data for sure.
> The explicit discrimination in universities against whites and asians is huge in comparison
In comparison to this specific resume effect it's pretty big, but that was just a basic example, not an attempt to list the biggest issue.
In comparison to the fortune 500 CEOs the overall effect here is smaller (no I'm not going to look at 5th decile in isolation).
Also even after this bias was applied, they're admitting a below-population-average amount of black students and a far above-population-average amount of asian students. So there's a bunch of other data necessary to properly analyze what's going on and how bad it is. Should there be a super tight correlation to academic decile? There are huge differences in school quality that muddy the signals, and those differences often correlate with race.
I'm not saying they did nothing wrong, but I'm saying it's unclear what the numbers should have been.
The least single industry was 3%. And each single industry is a very noisy data point, based on a couple companies and needing more data points. By the time you aggregate into more solid data, like those bigger categories, it's more than 3%.
But the whole thing could use better methods and more data for sure.
> The explicit discrimination in universities against whites and asians is huge in comparison
In comparison to this specific resume effect it's pretty big, but that was just a basic example, not an attempt to list the biggest issue.
In comparison to the fortune 500 CEOs the overall effect here is smaller (no I'm not going to look at 5th decile in isolation).
Also even after this bias was applied, they're admitting a below-population-average amount of black students and a far above-population-average amount of asian students. So there's a bunch of other data necessary to properly analyze what's going on and how bad it is. Should there be a super tight correlation to academic decile? There are huge differences in school quality that muddy the signals, and those differences often correlate with race.
I'm not saying they did nothing wrong, but I'm saying it's unclear what the numbers should have been.