= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Lumifer comments on Stranger Than History - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (329)
Yes, I am. I do not have a legally demonstratable business need (that's why I said it's a straightforward case). It just happens that business runs better with smart people than with stupid people. Therefore I prefer to hire smart people and in this context "high-IQ" is a synonym of "smart".
The outcome is clearly illegal under the disparate impact doctrine.
I am not sure what your position is here. That my desire to hire smart people is mistaken? That my ability to identify smart people is not be trusted?
I don't have a clue who 'you' are. For the firefighting department we started with, I challenge both inferences. And I'm baffled at having to spell this out.
In this subthread "I" means a fictional business manager in a hypothetical situation. Specifically, that manager wants to hire smart people and runs head-first into a disparate impact case.
Perhaps you should consider that other people think differently than you and often start from different assumptions, too.