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

Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

fortune.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 918 posts

Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

#81

Post by raincole »

linker3000 wrote: post #19
pjmlp wrote: post #4

It is all almost making richer even more richer, instead of properly hiring people for HR, AI bots. Instead of having more people at the supermarket, have the customers work as if they were employees, the only thing missing is fetching stuff from warehouse when missing on the shelves, but still pay the same or more. Instead of paying to artists, do job ads using generated AI images with code magically showing off mon…

At least one of my local, out of town, supermarkets doesn't have a warehouse any more. It's all Just in Time, with a residual amount above the main shelves. If you can't find what you want, they don't have it 'out back', because apart from an unloading area, there's no 'out back'.

It sounds... amazing? Less stockpile and spoilage. Less carbon footprint from transportation.

Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

#82

Post by add-sub-mul-div »

TheRoque wrote: post #78

What's preventing job seekers to come up with their own AI avatar job seeker and use it to attend these interviews? I ask this question sincerely because I have no clue how such interview goes, and where is the added value compared to just an automated email

The "added value" is that the use of AI tools is being forced by higher ups who are either earnestly gullible enough to believe they'll be an improvement or are cyncically working towards a future of needing only a small fraction of the current headcount.

Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

#83

Post by lm28469 »

jstummbillig wrote: post #74
pjmlp wrote: post #4

It is all almost making richer even more richer, instead of properly hiring people for HR, AI bots. Instead of having more people at the supermarket, have the customers work as if they were employees, the only thing missing is fetching stuff from warehouse when missing on the shelves, but still pay the same or more. Instead of paying to artists, do job ads using generated AI images with code magically showing off mon…

Counterpoint: AI in its current form is democratizing and allowing exactly the not rich to be relatively more dangerous. So yeah, the rich might use it to get richer. But so can everyone* else.

> AI in its current form is democratizing and allowing exactly the not rich to be relatively more dangerous.

Which part exactly ? The part where everyone pays 20+ a month to a few megacorps or the part where we willingly upload all our thoughts to a central server ?

Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

#84

Post by LastTrain »

9rx wrote: post #52
pjmlp wrote: post #4

It is all almost making richer even more richer, instead of properly hiring people for HR, AI bots. Instead of having more people at the supermarket, have the customers work as if they were employees, the only thing missing is fetching stuff from warehouse when missing on the shelves, but still pay the same or more. Instead of paying to artists, do job ads using generated AI images with code magically showing off mon…

> except they forget people also need money to buy their goods. Do they? Money is simply the accounting of debt. You do something for me, and when I can't immediately do something in return for you, you extend a loan to me so that I can make good on my side of the bargain later. If we record that I owe you something at some point in the future, we just created money! But if I don't need anything from you — because, s…

>> except they forget people also need money to buy their goods.

>Do they?

Yes they absolutely positively really do.

Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

#86

Post by em-bee »

9rx wrote: post #59
pjmlp wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Direct trading kind of died out towards the end of middle age, are we supposed to go back in time?

No, why? If people still want other people to do things for them, accounting isn't going anywhere. It has already been invented. We don't have to un-invent it. But, if this our future, then humans remain relevant, so there is no concern about job loss or anything of that nature. If, however, some future plays out where people aren't needed to work anymore, there will simply be no need for trade. The magical AIs, or w…

whatever [...] they think will eliminate the need to hire people, will provide instead

the problem is that whose who do that thinking want to enrich themselves and not provide for others. if that doesn't work, then they won't do it. so the question is, how do we get from the current situation to this life of abundance without letting the majority of people suffer in the transition. because that is hat will happen if we keep going as we are. less and less labor is needed, and the focus is on getting the money from those who still have an income while the rest are pushed into poverty.

i do not believe we will be able to make this kind of transition without a serious push in moral education. this can only work if we change our attitude towards those who can't find work.

personally though i do not believe we will ever need to eliminate work. there are so many worthwhile things we could do. i rather envision a future where the majority of jobs are in education, healthcare and research, almost everything else can mostly be automated. i believe humanity would benefit immensely if we took advantage of all of human potential instead of letting people stay at home.

Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

#87

Post by clusterhacks »

glimshe wrote: post #58

I don't know how to solve this in the current environment. A hiring manager friend said he's getting unprecedented number of application for a software engineering role. Ultimately applicants will endure whatever companies put in front of them with a job market that is this bad. If the government made this illegal companies would come out with ever increasingly silly filters, such as demanding specific college degree…

Just to add some hope and a different perspective, we received 23 applicants for an entry-level or early-career software developer position when it was open for a couple of months in early 2025. This is about the same number of applicants we usually get for an opening.

Applicant count for similar positions by year:

  23 - 2025 (the position I mentioned)
  31 - 2025
  10 - 2019
The above are three jobs where I was on the hiring committee and are relatively recent. My organization is relatively well-known but also pays a little bit below market in general.

I do think the market is very rough right now for software developers. I also know for a fact that "attractive" hiring companies can get a crazy number of applicants for each opening. SAS was famous for getting 1,000+ applicants per job just after the dotcom bust in the early 2000's.

Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

#88

Post by betaby »

KingOfCoders wrote: post #71
pjmlp wrote: post #4

It is all almost making richer even more richer, instead of properly hiring people for HR, AI bots. Instead of having more people at the supermarket, have the customers work as if they were employees, the only thing missing is fetching stuff from warehouse when missing on the shelves, but still pay the same or more. Instead of paying to artists, do job ads using generated AI images with code magically showing off mon…

"but still pay the same or more." Yeah margins in groceries are great.

> Yeah margins in groceries are great.

On some definitely are. At least in Canada grocery stores can get better margins by not selling prunes which go from green to dry (or rotten) hile on shelf. Various fruits are sold at loos and I see why.

At the same time I don't think kind-of AAA beef sold for $55-$110CAD has bad margins.

Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

#89

Post by Balgair »

I did one of these once. Once.

I felt so bad afterwards that I swore them off forever.

It's not like the 'interview' was terrible or anything. I knew it was AI from the start.

It was just that when I got done with it, I realized that I had talked at a computer for ~45 minutes. And, yet again, I was going to be ghosted by the company (I was), and that I was never going to get those 45 minutes back. That was time I could have used to apply for another job, or cook, or sleep, or exercise, or spend time with family. But no, like an idiot, I talked at a bot for that time for literally no reason.

Like, sure maaaaybe the company is going to use it as a screen for 'real' people. But the odds that it's not just another hoop they have for you to jump through are nil. If they send an AI 'interview' at you, that's the exact same as an email requesting yet more portfolio submissions. Pointless.

Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

#90

Post by lm28469 »

raincole wrote: post #81
linker3000 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least one of my local, out of town, supermarkets doesn't have a warehouse any more. It's all Just in Time, with a residual amount above the main shelves. If you can't find what you want, they don't have it 'out back', because apart from an unloading area, there's no 'out back'.

It sounds... amazing? Less stockpile and spoilage. Less carbon footprint from transportation.

Amazing until covid hits and everything is out of stock at t+ 5 minutes. Every major city is like 24 hours away from MAJOR riots if anything serious happens to the supply chain.
Post reply on HN