Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The computers rejecting job applications

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 261 posts

Re: The computers rejecting job applications

#101

Post by heelix »

JustARandomGuy wrote: post #90

Related story: I applied for a position with United Airlines a few months ago. I started the job application, then stopped in the middle for whatever reason. United’s job system emailed me at 9 PM a reminder to continue my application, and I completed it less than a half hour later. A half hour after that (just after 10 PM) United emailed me a rejection notice. So either some United recruiter was working late (I’m in…

Very early in my career, I did an open house where I chatted with their principal architect and got hired. A few weeks later, after I had been working for a week, I received a letter from HR rejecting me. I wandered over to the HR office and meekly asked if I was still employed - and thankfully was. Apparently they had just gotten to screening the resumes that were handed in at the open house.

Re: The computers rejecting job applications

#102

Post by swalsh »

joshuahughes wrote: post #98
swalsh wrote: post #86

10 years ago I was so excited and optimistic about the future technology was going to bring us. As that future comes closer it's quickly becoming quite clear that this entire industry is bringing us a giant dystopian future. Tech companies have more power then governments, individual privacy is gone. Corporations, already pretty impersonal, have completed the transition to treating people as "resources", completely d…

I wish it wasn't true, but the path we're headed down is pretty much set now. I can't help feeling that the habit of removing identifying markers (names, ages, etc) from resumes to try to ensure equality in hiring is also part of the same ill-fated direction. I dearly wish that the world I was leaving my kids wasn't so dehumanised.

It goes beyond resumes. Our criminal justice system also uses AI to make judgement decisions. I understand the need to eliminate bias from systems (though I question how much bias is actually being eliminated via these systems) but the need to humanize people when they are most vulnerable is important.

Re: The computers rejecting job applications

#103

Post by wu_187 »

jakub_g wrote: post #49

FWIW (at least in tech industry), apparently the automated filtering systems are a myth spread by companies who make money on the promise to optimize your resume to get past the filter. https://twitter.com/GergelyOrosz/status/1292909844886945792 (The OP of the tweet was an engineering manager in several big tech companies, wrote The Software Engineer’s Guidebook last year, and talked with many recruiters in the proce…

I talked to a recruiter for a three letter company, and they told me that they actively search for keywords on people's resumes and the applications that most apply to the role. This would in fact be considered filtering. Now I don't know if the software they use (brassring) automatically "suggests" applicants (which would imply automated filtering) or not.

Re: The computers rejecting job applications

#104

Post by dimitrios1 »

patrickthebold wrote: post #89
dcolkitt wrote: post #36

The next logical step would be to train an adversarial AI against the hiring AI. You'd have the system generate your resume and application to maximize your chances. Then the hiring AI would need to be re-trained to account for this. And so on. In the far future, this feedback loop creates an economy where every job application is total gibberish. No human can possibly explain why their resume is a recipe for carne a…

I have a section on my resume called: 'Technologies I'm Unfamiliar With' Underneath is a Laundry list of today's sexiest technologies. It's not quite as advanced as your suggestion, but it's pretty effective. It's also a good icebreaker when you have the in person interview.

I've always viewed staying up with the latest tools, technologies, and practices as part of my job. I've also found that the people who tend to not do this or display a similar sentiment you touched on with your comment, it's because you have carved out a large enough amount of success or niche with what you are working with. Am I reading into this too far?

Re: The computers rejecting job applications

#105

Post by zippergz »

aspaceman wrote: post #93
jakub_g wrote: post #49

FWIW (at least in tech industry), apparently the automated filtering systems are a myth spread by companies who make money on the promise to optimize your resume to get past the filter. https://twitter.com/GergelyOrosz/status/1292909844886945792 (The OP of the tweet was an engineering manager in several big tech companies, wrote The Software Engineer’s Guidebook last year, and talked with many recruiters in the proce…

Huh? This directly disagrees with my experience. I believe this person is mistaken. Resumes are always filtered before they hit my desk, I just never even knew the filter happened. Apparently they toss out a huge amount. Reading this tweet in depth disagrees with a lot of my experience in Fortune 500 tech companies. Can’t figure out the misunderstanding.

If you never knew it happened, how do you... know it happened?

I can't conclusively say one way or the other. I have been a hiring manager at a F500 tech company and have never seen direct evidence of any automatic filtering or rejections.

Anyone speaking with complete confidence in either direction needs to bring actual evidence...

Re: The computers rejecting job applications

#106

Post by jdmichal »

OliverGilan wrote: post #38

About a year and half ago I was applying for a software engineering internship at Goldman Sachs and they made me take a Pymetrics test. One of the tasks was to press the spacebar as many times as possible in 30 seconds. I didn't do the task and withdrew my application.

Is it bad that my first reaction would be to bind autohotkey to spam out space bar events?

Re: The computers rejecting job applications

#107

Post by kstrauser »

technofiend wrote: post #78
BerislavLopac wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've read once of a company who fired everyone who had below average performance score.

It's more typical to fire the bottom 10% but that's derisively called rank and yank. Microsoft, HP and others have allegedly used it at one time or another. The assumption is if you do your job well you'll rank well. The reality is your job becomes ensuring you rank well, which may not 100% align with doing the job you were hired for well.

It also neglects that you'll always have a bottom 10%, even if those people are absolutely amazing: hire 10 Harvard PhDs and one of them will be at the bottom.

I can't believe stack ranking ever caught on.

Re: The computers rejecting job applications

#108

Post by woeirua »

joshuahughes wrote: post #98
swalsh wrote: post #86

10 years ago I was so excited and optimistic about the future technology was going to bring us. As that future comes closer it's quickly becoming quite clear that this entire industry is bringing us a giant dystopian future. Tech companies have more power then governments, individual privacy is gone. Corporations, already pretty impersonal, have completed the transition to treating people as "resources", completely d…

I wish it wasn't true, but the path we're headed down is pretty much set now. I can't help feeling that the habit of removing identifying markers (names, ages, etc) from resumes to try to ensure equality in hiring is also part of the same ill-fated direction. I dearly wish that the world I was leaving my kids wasn't so dehumanised.

> I can't help feeling that the habit of removing identifying markers (names, ages, etc) from resumes to try to ensure equality in hiring is also part of the same ill-fated direction.

What? There is well documented and clear evidence that these indicators actually lead to highly biased decisions regarding who gets interviewed. Removing them is the right thing to do.

Re: The computers rejecting job applications

#109

Post by cullinap »

This reminds me of the nfl combine but for jobs. There are plenty of examples of players that do well in the combine but fail in the nfl. Your test just selects for individuals who are good at testing and not necessarily good at their potential job.

Re: The computers rejecting job applications

#110

Post by CodesInChaos »

thekyle wrote: post #96
KineticLensman wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

See 'the secretary problem' [0], which is a more sophisticated version of the above. It's a process that can be summarised roughly as follows. Given a pile of CVs Read approximately 40% of them (actually 1/e, or ~0.368) Dump that 40% Select the first candidate that is better than the ones you have just dumped [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secretary_problem

The secretary problem says that once you pass on a CV you cannot go back and latter decide you want that person. I don't think that is a restriction that exists in real life hiring. It is possible to review all the CVs and then decide which one to pick.

When I was involved in hiring, we received a steady stream of CVs and then had to decide if we want to interview and eventually hire or reject a candidate (typically we decided right after the interview or programming task).

While there is a short time window in which multiple candidates might be evaluated, this approach is pretty close to the assumptions of the secretary problem.

Post reply on HN