Weapons Of Math Destruction Analysis

987 Words2 Pages

No one thinks that they have an impact on the world. But everyone does; everyone is a number in some algorithm. Each and every one of us is turned into numbers and those stats mean certain things and are used to either do good or in some cases, bad things. The book “ Weapons of Math Destruction”, Cathy O’Neil talks about the dangers of turning people into numbers and how people don't even know that it is happening.A lot can go wrong when people are no longer people and they are turned into jus number. People could be placed in the wrong group because they went through a rough time for a short period of time, and that could ruin their lives, but computers only see numbers, not the person themselves. Job interviews that should have happened, …show more content…

Most people would believe that when they don't get a call back it is because they just didn't fit in with what the company wanted, but that may not be true in situations. To save money, companies choose to have computers run through all the applications to see what run best. But computers can have problems with their programs and make mistakes. But that is not what they are worried about, according to O’Neil, “ The first was to boost efficiency, letting the machine handle much of the grunt work” (O’Neil 116). So again, instead of taking the time and extra money to get someone to look at these people, they would rather save money and risk the mistakes. Another thing that the computers look at is where they came from, in the book O’Neil states “But it could correlate the rejected applications of the past with birthplaces and, to a lesser degree, surnames. So people from certain places, like Africa, Pakistan, and immigrant Neighborhoods of the United Kingdom, received lower overall scores and were not invited to interviews” ( O’Neil 117). So people who grew up in certain locations were held to the standard that they could not do the job they applied for. They were just skipped over because of where they lived. If they looked at the actual person, and not the location, they may have found different things that the computer did not see. They might see that this person is just going through a rough time and all they can afford is a house in that area. They could also see that they may have been one of the top students in their class, but because of where they live, they are looked over when they could have possibly been the best one for the job. This also applies to people that shouldn't have gotten the interview. A person that may have just been lucky at the time does not mean that they are the right person. They may look like a friendly

Open Document