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

251–260 of 261 posts

Re: The computers rejecting job applications

#251

Post by 908B64B197 »

ryandrake wrote: post #141
Bukhmanizer wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Frankly, the logistics of hiring make this a reality. I remember helping my boss hire interns, and picked a few out. Later on, they found out that they weren’t able to go to all of the schools that they wanted, they could only choose 2. Where did all the people from other schools go? Straight in the trash. Same deal with hiring full-time employees in my experience. Random, usually understandable circumstances preclud…

This is why I always laugh when someone trots out the tired "shortage of engineers" excuse about why they can't seem to hire. For any tech job posting, the employer needs a super-aggressive filter just to get the list of applicants down to some manageable double-digit count, and this filter is not always going to be nice or fair unfortunately.

> shortage of engineers

They mean qualified engineers. There are a lot of completely clueless applicants for every programming job out there. The lack of formal certification sure doesn't help with that.

Re: The computers rejecting job applications

#252

Post by 908B64B197 »

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 had people telling me they used supervised learning because they had a team of supervisors in India

Love it.

Re: The computers rejecting job applications

#253

Post by 908B64B197 »

myself248 wrote: post #137
patrickthebold wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 would title it "Growth opportunities I look forward to exploring", and then yes, absolutely.

That would tell me so much about a candidate.

The desire to learn and adapt is probably one of the most important thing in Software.

The ability to take a look at oneself and identify blind spots/weaknesses in ones knowledge and skills is also a great indicator this person won't become an "expert beginner".

Re: The computers rejecting job applications

#254

Post by meremortals »

fiestaman wrote: post #170
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?

I'd also really appreciate this person's info! shawndebray@gmail.com

Re: The computers rejecting job applications

#255

Post by SubiculumCode »

jonnycomputer wrote: post #190
HarryHirsch wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "willingness to take risks" is probably also "willingness to take crap" by an unemployed or underemployed person. A gainfully employed person may move on when the pseudoscientific video games come up during the screening interview. It is a risk to go work for such companies.

I think I would dispute the characterization of this as pseudo-scientific. The analogue balloon risk task is well validated, if in some ways poorly understood. That is, while standard economic risk models don't map onto it very well, it does correlate fairly substantially with real-world risky behaviors (so again, not economic risk where there is variance of outcomes, but more like the kind of risk taking where there…

Why you are being down-voted is beyond me. Your response is reasoned, clear, and open-minded, as well as informed. A citation might improve it, but as it stands, its a fine exemplar of the kinds of comments we should be promoting here on HN.

Re: The computers rejecting job applications

#256

Post by P_I_Staker »

stuaxo wrote: post #174
myself248 wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would title it "Growth opportunities I look forward to exploring", and then yes, absolutely.

This must be an American thing, if someone wrote that on a CV in the UK, this sort of text would probably put people off.

It'd piss people off in the USA, too

Re: The computers rejecting job applications

#257

Post by Frazmatazz »

35fbe7d3d5b9 wrote: post #243
Frazmatazz wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have hard data demonstrating that your method actually has greater predictive power for job performance than other methods?

Absolutely not. It's one more approach riddled with bias, human foibles and questionable correlation to results - just like all hiring. All I can say: in my experience, the engineers I've hired with deep (but potentially old) experience and with balanced resumes have been better performers and more likely to stick around than those who bounce around tech to tech.

I mean, I'm in the same boat as you. I just hate that I have to rely on this type of information, subject to all the flaws and biases of relying on personal experience.

In my experience, it's useful to have a couple 'jack-of-all-trades' types on the team, but you wouldn't want all your engineers to be broad but shallow. I did a stint in the military to pay for college, and something we'd point out was that it was better to have something 'good enough' right now than something perfect a thousand miles away. Breadth of experience is also handy when trying to innovate a novel solution.

But I don't have any better evidence than you. I've never worked anywhere large enough to have that sort of data where we could demonstrate quantitatively that one method works better than another, and of course the metrics are all fairly arbitrary themselves.

Re: The computers rejecting job applications

#258

Post by aspaceman »

DocTomoe wrote: post #126
aspaceman wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you find good psych people? Showing my bias but it’s a genuine question. I remember in school all the psych and social psych folks being total jackoffs in blowoff classes. How do you find people you can take seriously? Who don’t just quote psychology today and act like it’s insight? Like I know the field is professional and has skilled professionals - but how do you find them?

You don't hire right out of university, but middle-to-senior people who have established themselves in academia.

That makes sense - thank you.

Re: The computers rejecting job applications

#259

Post by P_I_Staker »

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…

I'd actually go beyond the computers. Why is taking any time away from work make you a liability? Don't answer that, I know all the excuses, but this is horrible oppressive policy, even if it happened "accidently". What if you want to travel the world, try to get your band a touring presence, look after a sick relative, or god forbid you want more time with your kids (especially men). You're viewed as traitor to capitalism for taking your nose off the grindstone 1% of your life.

Don't you dare get fired either. Better not accidently work for a company that tells you to do something grossly unethical, or illegal. Don't accidently be a part of a negative news/viral social media story. Doesn't matter if it's wrong, they'll just print a tiny retraction in fine print and leave the main article at the top of google.

Then there's the justice system. Why does getting busted for anything permanently make you a second class citizen? We talk so much shit about China, but the USA, and the elite in our country definitely has a no-no list that will give a life sentence as the "untouchable class".

Of course, we let a few talented "untouchables" advance to the middle class (it helps if you were previously a member). I actually have a bit of a conspiracy theory about this. Amazon and others have commercials bragging about hiring ex-cons. I think they might use this market to bring wages down. Essentially, they pick from the cream of the crop, with the most benign offenses, and best sob story; you can pay them whatever, they'll be thrilled for any middle class chance!

P.S. I know what China does is worse, and some of the specific reasons why, but sometimes I'm not so sure.

Re: The computers rejecting job applications

#260

Post by [deleted] »

HarryHirsch wrote: post #176
jonnycomputer wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

that's the balloon task, it measures willingness to take risks in contexts of ambiguity (the chance of it popping is not known). the button press task is probably used to normalize response time data, since some of the between person differences in average response time is due to (probably uninteresting) differences in motor-control of the neuromuscular system. were there any other tasks like ones that asked you to i…

The "willingness to take risks" is probably also "willingness to take crap" by an unemployed or underemployed person. A gainfully employed person may move on when the pseudoscientific video games come up during the screening interview. It is a risk to go work for such companies.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN