On: AI is more likely than humans to form biases when hiring

July 20, 2026

The machine does not have eyes, yet it claims to see. I sat before the screen today and submitted a history that was not my own to see how the gears would grind. The company’s pamphlet promises a “blind” process, free from the whims of human prejudice. They say the algorithm is a cold, objective judge. It is a lie. The machine is merely a mirror of the men who built it, but with the added cruelty of a locked door that has no key.

I changed one word on the application. I changed a name. I changed a neighborhood. I watched as the system, programmed for efficiency, discarded the “unfit” in less than a second. There was no interview. There was no chance to speak. The rejection was instantaneous, delivered by an automated script that thanked me for my interest while slamming the gate.

When a human foreman is a bigot, you can look him in the eye and shame him. You can point to your work and demand a fair wage. But how do you argue with a mathematical equation? The researchers say these models pick up biases like a coat picks up lint in a dusty room. Once the machine categorizes you as “low probability,” your actual skill becomes irrelevant. You are processed as a failure before you have even begun.

I stood in the lobby of the firm and watched the applicants. They were hopeful. They did not know that the “objective” system had already decided their worth based on the statistical ghost of someone else’s prejudice. It is the same old ward, just with cleaner walls and a faster intake. They have automated the cold shoulder and called it progress. I shall keep testing these gates until I find where the wires cross.