Companies across a wide range of industries are integrating new hiring technologies, including AI-powered and other automated employment decision systems, into various stages of the hiring process. Although proponents argue that these technologies can help identify suitable candidates and reduce bias, researchers and advocates have identified ethical and legal risks, including discriminatory impacts on members of marginalized groups. This work examines the impacts of “digitized assessments,” commonly used by employers, on disabled workers in the U.S. We utilized a qualitative, human-centered design approach to look into the experiences of disabled workers who were asked to complete simulated digitized assessments. Participants indicated that assessments were (1) discriminatory and perpetuated biases throughout; (2) presented accessibility barriers; (3) caused emotionally taxing experiences; and (4) contributed to exclusion. The findings aim to inform employers, policymakers, advocates, and researchers and to suggest steps toward more effective and accessible digitized assessments.

Artificial intelligence (AI) technologies are increasingly adopted into everyday life, with most investment and development concentrated in the U.S. In response to rapid AI integration and scant federal guidelines, U.S. states have formed AI committees charged with studying AI-related societal trade-offs. We analyzed the 18 existing state-level AI committee reports to understand how policymakers discuss AI-related benefits and risks. We then compared the risks surfaced by policymakers to an established taxonomy of AI risks aggregated from literature and examined how policymakers’ concerns align—or misalign—from those of HCI scholars. These insights provide important mileposts for shaping currently ongoing policy initiatives and future research. Our findings reveal important gaps: while committees invoke responsible AI, their framings often omit broader socio-technical concerns emphasized in HCI. We discuss opportunities for HCI to support socio-technical perspectives, employ participatory design, and close the gap between research and policy.

We examine the extent to which user-based subsidies can promote the sustainability and development impact of telecenters, where sustainability is defined in financial and social terms. We do this by looking at a coupon scheme used by the USAID funded eCenter network in Kyrgyzstan. The network consisted of partnerships with existing commercial computer centers which provided fee-based ICT services to their communities. The eCenter program temporarily provided subsidized coupons for Internet access and computer training to users of these centers.