> For candidates genuinely lacking skills, our tool doesn't save them - they still fail technical assessments and follow-ups. The system eventually catches those who don't belong.
If a candidate gets the position because they used your tool to fool the interviewers, and they later get fired, then you’ve wasted a huge amount of the hiring company’s time and money as well as the time of the team who has to cope with the situation. I know this doesn’t affect your business model because they got through the interview and that’s all that has to matter to you, but anyone who has had to deal with a bad hire is going to despise tools like this.
When you’re aware that Google’s “agenda” is just attempting to include more types of people by default in output, posts like this sound bizarre. Some of the scenarios Gemini generated were ridiculous, but so too are the stereotypes like “CEO = white male” that Stable Diffusion and other models would assume.
It’s hard to trust that people this intensely upset about Google’s issues aren’t seeking to benefit from leaving stereotypes and other biases from training intact.