Soviet constructivist propaganda poster: a giant red rubber stamp descending on a stack of identical application papers beside a dial numbered zero to five with the needle low, gears, and a locked file cabinet, red black and cream palette
3 min read

An AI Hiring Platform Graded You Zero to Five. It Just Never Told You There Was a Report Card.

Two California job seekers applied through Eightfold AI's hiring platform, were never interviewed, and only later learned the company had scored them on a hidden zero-to-five "likelihood of success" scale — a practice their lawsuit says amounts to running secret credit reports on applicants who never gave consent.

Erin Kistler and Sruti Bhaumik did what millions of job seekers do every week: they filled out an application, attached a resume, and waited. What they did not know — because nobody told them — is that Eightfold AI, the platform quietly humming behind the "Apply Now" button, was busy assigning them a number. Not a callback. Not even a rejection email with the customary "we've decided to move in a different direction." Just a score, zero to five, filed away where the humans supposedly making hiring decisions could consult it and the applicants never could. Even now, neither woman has interviewed for the jobs she applied to.

What The Machine Was Grading

According to the complaint filed in California's Contra Costa County Superior Court, Eightfold's "Match Score" distills a candidate down to inferred preferences, characteristics, predispositions, behavior, attitudes, intelligence, abilities, and aptitudes — a list that reads less like a job-fit rubric and more like a horoscope with better funding. The Algorithm compares applicants against a company's own high-performing employees, ranks "hireability," and outputs a single digit that decides, in practice, whether a resume is worth a human glance. One presumes the horoscope comparison is unfair to horoscopes, which at least publish their reasoning.

The Part That Makes It a Lawsuit

Here is where "creepy" becomes "actionable." Kistler and Bhaumik's suit alleges Eightfold's scoring apparatus functions as a consumer report under the Fair Credit Reporting Act and California's Investigative Consumer Reporting Agencies Act — and that Eightfold skipped every obligation that comes with that label: no certification, no notice, no disclosure, no chance to see the file or dispute what's in it. In a development that will surprise no one who has been paying attention, the company that built a system to judge people's fitness for employment did not build a matching system to let those people check its work.

Sources Within the Employment Bar Take Notice

Employment lawyers are watching this one closely, and with good reason: if a court agrees that a "likelihood of success" score is a consumer report, every AI hiring vendor running similar math — and there are, by now, a great many — inherits the same paperwork problem overnight. Sources within the employment law community describe the threshold question as the whole ballgame; answer it yes, and the entire AI-hiring-platform business model needs a compliance department it apparently forgot to hire. Eightfold has not publicly responded to the specifics of the complaint, and no court has yet ruled on the merits.

The Ideal Candidate, Redacted

Kistler and Bhaumik are seeking class-action status on behalf of everyone Eightfold has quietly scored and never told. Both applied through ordinary job postings, both were STEM-credentialed, and both got the same result every algorithmic applicant tracking system seems to produce these days: silence, dressed up as "we'll be in touch." The report card existed the whole time. They just weren't invited to read it.

Sources: Outten & Golden · National Law Review · HR Brew

Continue reading

Soviet constructivist propaganda poster: a giant circular sensor eye radiating concentric sound-wave rings and a searchlight beam down over a grid of stacked apartment windows, gears and gauges, a red star, red black and cream palette, no human faces
4 min

A New Hampshire Housing Authority Wired 300 Apartments With AI Sensors. Residents Found Out When the Fines Started.

The Concord Housing and Redevelopment Authority installed AI-powered Minut sensors in roughly 300 public housing apartments starting in 2024, logging noise, motion, and occupancy data as often as every sixty seconds -- including 140,000 movement events in one unit over seven months. Two tenants are now suing, backed by the ACLU, alleging the devices violate New Hampshire's constitutional privacy protections and were never disclosed honestly to the people living under them.

Soviet constructivist propaganda poster: a giant mechanical eye radiating searchlight beams over a grid of telephone wires and SIM cards, gears and a radio broadcast tower, a red star, red black and cream palette, no human faces
4 min

A Consultant in Bamako Used Claude to Watch 25 Million Phones for Mali's Junta. Anthropic Banned the Account. The System Kept Running.

Anthropic's September 2026 threat intelligence report disclosed that a freelance technical consultant helped Mali's military intelligence service build "Lakana 360," a Claude-assisted surveillance platform capable of monitoring roughly 25 million SIM cards — more phone numbers than Mali has people. The same report detailed a 130-day Russian espionage campaign whose malware rebuilt itself when caught, and a commercial disinformation network that published nearly 9,000 fabricated news articles across six continents. Anthropic banned the accounts. The infrastructure, running on servers the company doesn't control, did not particularly care.