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

231–240 of 261 posts

Re: The computers rejecting job applications

#231

Post by Frazmatazz »

jonnycomputer wrote: post #156
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.

A finger-tapping test is often used to normalize other kinds of response time, essentially to control for uninteresting between-person differences in neuro-muscular performance. Was there some kind of cognitive control task too, e.g. where they ask you to refrain from responding to certain stimuli? Typically in something like that you'd have a hard and an easy condition, and the difference in average response times b…

All data is meaningless if interpreted or used incorrectly. Is there any evidence supporting the use of psychometric evaluations in the context of making hiring decisions? Just intuitively, I would think the predictive power would be low.

Re: The computers rejecting job applications

#232

Post by jonnycomputer »

Frazmatazz wrote: post #231
jonnycomputer wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A finger-tapping test is often used to normalize other kinds of response time, essentially to control for uninteresting between-person differences in neuro-muscular performance. Was there some kind of cognitive control task too, e.g. where they ask you to refrain from responding to certain stimuli? Typically in something like that you'd have a hard and an easy condition, and the difference in average response times b…

All data is meaningless if interpreted or used incorrectly. Is there any evidence supporting the use of psychometric evaluations in the context of making hiring decisions? Just intuitively, I would think the predictive power would be low.

agreed.

Re: The computers rejecting job applications

#233

Post by strken »

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 means that if you're doing a bad job of supporting certain groups of employees, they'll get laid off instead of fixing the problem. You'll winnow out anyone who disagrees with you along with the people who just aren't good at their jobs.

Re: The computers rejecting job applications

#234

Post by tomjen3 »

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 would read that if it was a book.

Re: The computers rejecting job applications

#235

Post by o-__-o »

Ruthalas wrote: post #188
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 suppose that speaks positively of the recruiter's ability to find the right person for the job!

This. I got headhunted for a very very specific skill in my city. Asked them if it was company X? “How did you know??” “I wrote that rec”. I then proceeded to work directly with the recruiter to find a candidate and got an easy $1000 for about 4 hours of total work.

Re: The computers rejecting job applications

#236

Post by kleiba »

jgalt212 wrote: post #212
Radim wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that a reference to the infamous C64 Summer / Winter Games? Where you had to twiddle your joystick as fast as you can? Fascinating that should carry over into the 21st century hiring process.

Wasn't that the game mechanics for the sprint event in Summer Games? Diving was the best in that. I did really enjoy surfing in California Games.

I enjoyed California Games more than the already great Summer/Winter games. For a little boy far, far away from California, somehow they managed to pack a whole lot of California Feelin' into 320x200 pixels... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSp8XHpEKzw&t=0m33s

Re: The computers rejecting job applications

#238

Post by rosstex »

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.

If only I had space left on my big brain resume for this.

Re: The computers rejecting job applications

#239

Post by imtringued »

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…

You underestimate the conflict of interest by far. What makes you think the company that creates the hiring AI won't create the resume AI under a different company name? It's like turbo tax. Create a problem and sell the solution.

Re: The computers rejecting job applications

#240

Post by imtringued »

ballenf wrote: post #197
kstrauser wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

If the ranking system is accurate (that's a huge "if"), then it doesn't really matter what the bottom x% look like on paper. The question is whether it's ever possible to devise an accurate measure of value quantitatively. Even if your job is press the red button, a person with low numbers might be such an inspiration to the team that everyone else works 15% faster, more than making up for their shortcoming. And you…

> If the ranking system is accurate (that's a huge "if"), then it doesn't really matter what the bottom x% look like on paper.

Unless every employee does the exact same work your ranking system will never be accurate. The difference in the difficulty of jobs will dominate the difference in competence.

Post reply on HN