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

161–170 of 261 posts

Re: The computers rejecting job applications

#161

Post by marcosdumay »

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.

Resume Index:

Personal Information ... 1

Education and Certifications ... 1

Previous Experience ... 1:2

Known Technologies ... 2

Technologies I'm Unfamiliar With ... 2:348

Re: The computers rejecting job applications

#162

Post by mafuy »

encom wrote: post #122
aboringusername wrote: post #119

Computers decide if you get a job (and access to a resource called "money", pretty important for living). Computers decide if your Google accounts gets deleted, without warning. Computers decide if you can get credit, or open a bank, or participate in society. And there is 0, yup, 0 accountability. Computer doesn't like you? Tough shit, get fucked, nothing you can do. If you don't have an internet connection, you're…

This is maybe true in Silicon Valley. Not in the real world. Also, nobody needs a Google account.

I wish it were as you say. Effectively, at least a facebook account was needed at two of the universities I was at. I've also seen instances of important (even life threatening) information being transmitted via social networks, exclusively. So yes, sometimes you pretty much have to be part of that game.

Re: The computers rejecting job applications

#163

Post by zaptheimpaler »

Yeah it sucks computers do this but its important to remember people can be equally cruel. Big tech companies who need talent arbitrarily accept/reject candidates based on resume buzzwords and whether they can leetcode. But the long tail of small companies, often run by idiots or frat bros of some kind will reject you for reasons stupider still - dont like hair, not hot enough, can only drink 2 beers?, only knows Java LMAO.

In other industries, psychometrics are common and even effective. I remember one dull self help author talking about how insurance companies screen for optimism because lol you're gonna need it to consistently make 100 calls a day, knowing only 5 people will buy. Meaning forget merit, EVEN IF you make it past the randomness filter, your interview & job performance is determined based on largely immoveable parts of your personality. Don't forget, the corporate world outside of the rarefied space of tech is an absolute shit show.

Whenever i feel like ranting against how shitty AI is, remember folks, i remember the majority of humans suck too. It gives me a warm, cozy feeling like I'm a turkey the day before thanksgiving.

Re: The computers rejecting job applications

#164

Post by joshuahughes »

woeirua wrote: post #108
joshuahughes wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

There are positives, and there are also negatives. Both have been well-documented.

My point was a more general one, that we are being sucked into a strangely anti-human world where those in power would like nothing more than to reduce us to a mere employee number. Just data in a spreadsheet. It's so much less messy that way, right?

Re: The computers rejecting job applications

#165

Post by valentinemsmith »

This reminds me of when I was working for an EdTech startup nearly a decade ago where the CEO invented his own “Mini Myers Briggs” test, and we developed a “feature” to reject any teachers applying who came back INTJ after filling out that stupid test. The CEO adamantly believed INTJs didn’t make good teachers.

Re: The computers rejecting job applications

#166

Post by pavel_lishin »

> "Everyone wants the right job, and to hire the right person. It doesn't benefit anyone for the match to be off. Trying to use these AI systems in smart ways is to everyone's advantage."

I mean, that's flagrantly untrue. There are plenty of, I hesitate to use the term "bad actors", but people who will lie and embellish their resume, tailor their answers to these personality quizzes in an optimal way, and otherwise game the system to maximize their payoff - which is to get hired.

Re: The computers rejecting job applications

#167

Post by marcosdumay »

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.

Well, I guess the joke works perfectly well for 10% too. The company will just live for a bit longer.

The fact that the practice is immediately visible as stupid does not stop real companies from adopting it.

Re: The computers rejecting job applications

#168

Post by curiousllama »

metrics314 wrote: post #143
curiousllama wrote: post #40

I was part of a very in-depth evaluations of both Pymetrics & HireVue for a large company recently (2 different evals, among others). Some interesting things we observed: (1) It was not clear to us, with any level of certainty, whether either tool did anything more useful than filter out people who don't want to take the test / don't trust "AI". (2) It was not clear to us, with any level of certainty, whether (1) was…

I’m an IO psych at a large tech company that evaluated pymetrics against job performance and there was no relationship, just near 0 correlations so recommended not using them and we don’t. These AI tools are not transparent enough in explaining their outcomes and lack what we call face validity or job relevance. A coding test is at least a good filter at the top for entry level roles with large pools because it has r…

This is why tech companies are good. Our output basically said "this is entirely indistinguishable from random choice," and we got the response "Great! Can't get sued over randomness!"

Re: The computers rejecting job applications

#169

Post by treeman79 »

2112 wrote: post #157
treeman79 wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Got a call from a recruiter that was looking for an oddly specific combination of skills. Me, so it’s Company X? He was flabbergasted. I gave 3 months notice. I was literally the only person in the world with that combination of skills. So I asked how much, went to bosses, I’ll stay on longer if you pay me that rate. Good money for a few months.

I'm curious about what the combination of skills was ?

Obscure mainframe tech and ruby, VB. About 15 years ago.

Re: The computers rejecting job applications

#170

Post by fiestaman »

SharpeDidntFoul wrote: post #142

You can pay about $250 for someone to optimize your resume with certain key words, punctuation, and formatting choices to make it through these systems. I did this and it worked. I was going for entry level finance roles in tech and finance. I went to a top 40 finance program, interned at Morgan Stanley, a hedge fund, and a respectable incubator, but had a hard time getting replies to my job applications. I used all…

I'm applying to stuff right now, mind emailing me this person's information?
Post reply on HN