Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers
191–200 of 918 posts
Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers
#192> “The truth is, if you want a job, you’re gonna go through this thing,” Adam Jackson, CEO and founder of Braintrust, a company that distributes AI interviewers, tells Fortune. “If there were a large portion of the job-seeking community that were wholesale rejecting this, our clients wouldn’t find the tool useful… This thing would be chronically underperforming for our clients. And we’re just not seeing that—we’re se…
Some companies genuinely don't care though; they're a meatgrinder that just need to get warm souls into the machine. Ironically: These are the companies that are being eaten alive by AI right now.
Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers
#193Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's where we're headed _if we let these assholes get away with it_. They have the money and guns, but we have the numbers.
The sickle and hammer looking real interesting now.
Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers
#194I 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 co…
My rule for interviews is the company has to spend equal human time or I decline. This means no 8 hour tests, no talking to computers, no special little projects for me to evaluate me. You get equal face time and no more than 45 minutes of me doing anything by myself (that's the max leeway). If you want me to do anything else either I'm getting paid short term contractor rates or making you make a sizable donation to…
The problem with AI interviews (and much of the hiring automation in general) is that (a) it's not good faith, it scales so that all the candidates can be made to do work that nobody ever looks at. If I'm on a short list of two people for a Director level position, I'd happily spend 8 hours making a presentation to give. If I'm one of a thousand and haven't even had an indication that I've passed some basic screening, not so much. And (b), all this stuff usually applies to junior positions where the same payoff isn't there. I've worked for months with customers to get consulting contracts before, and obviously price accordingly so it nets out to be worth it. Doesn't work if you're putting in all the free work for a low probability chance at an entry level job.
Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers
#195I had AI interview recently and I was a little offended considering the level of position so I decided to go off script and complain about the perception it gave them rather than answering the questions. It neatly transcribed this and sent it to an HR drone who actually called me the next day and apologised as it was new technology that they had decided to use. But it turned out the advertised position didn't exist a…
Name and shame.
Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers
#196Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers
#197Earlier quoted context omitted.
"While some worry AI will dehumanize the hiring process, we believe the opposite." "AI will create jobs instead of destroying them." "AI will solve the climate crisis despite doubling or tripling humanity's energy footprint." At some point it became acceptable to lie to the public with a straight face.
“war is peace”, “ignorance is strength”…
https://theonion.com/this-war-will-destabilize-the-entire-mi...
Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers
#198I 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…
2. If you get a lot of generally-competent employees after applying reasonable filters (e.g. matching skillset, expected salary), don't give them a long automated test, pick a smaller set randomly. All of them have demonstrated competence, and the likelihood that the test will give you more the more competent employees is offset by the likelihood that they'll move forward with applications more respectful of their time.
3. Do final-stage (human) interviews with the small set of employees, where you test specific skills relevant to the job. Here you can also throw a couple general-skill questions to ensure the applicant really is generally competent; it's not disrespecting their time, because it's part of the interview time and you're spending it as well (maybe it is if the entire interview is especially long, but then you're wasting also your own time).
The important part is 1). Otherbranch may not be good or popular, but at least if/when employee supply falls below demand, "mass interview" seems like something employers will need to filter out bad applicants without wasting good applicants' time.
Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers
#199Or, you know, send your own AI agent into the interview.
Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers
#200Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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.
Everything in groceries has bad margins. Grocery shops are not making the money, food conglomerates are making the money if you look at earnings.