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

201–210 of 918 posts

Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

#201

Post by spwa4 »

reactordev wrote: post #106
spwa4 wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Government spending benefits everyone. Which means it effectively doesn't benefit the rich much at all. Hence ...

Government spending is going to get choked out from the middle class and lower class not having any money. You think the rich pay taxes?

No, I don't (well, somewhere between 5% and 20%, it's not magical). But how it works, fundamentally, the rich exchange goods and services for new debt, in various forms.

That also shows why you can't touch the rich with the government: first, where would it get goods and services? And when the government gets goods and services it's for "the public good", which effectively means largely for the poor (especially if you reason the way governments do: the palace for the prime minister is the infrastructure that provides for the poor. So that room is really for the poor too, just like the many side-hustles the prime minister and many government figures have. But even disregarding government excess ... mostly these goods and services acquired really are for the poor). Second, the wealth of the rich is really something like 1%-5% of those new goods and services produced. That's what it fundamentally is, that wealth. If you take that away, the incentive for production falls away. And even that ignores the added difficulty that the richest "rich" in the US, by an extreme amount, are the pension funds, especially in aggregate. Attacking the rich will mean taking pensions from old people.

Which leads immediately to the consequence of going after big companies and "the rich": no more (much less) new goods and services. Because nobody's going to replace them, or, if someone does replace them, they become the new rich and you've achieved nothing.

AND there's a major, major, MAJOR catch in replacing the rich. The current rich see the social contract roughly like this "if we provide society roughly as-is, we get to be rich". If you replace the current rich with new MAGA rich, for example, they will demand a new social contract which you may VERY much dislike. For example, Microsoft, Google (even Apple, when it comes to computers) see the freedom to develop and run your own programs, as well as free communication over the internet, as an essential part of their "deal" with society. Chinese and Indian computer producers very much do not see things this way (but are largely, not 100%, 99%, forced into allowing it, at least in the US and Europe, by the current US rich). It seems to me unlikely in the extreme that if the US gets a new rich class, replacing these companies, that this will remain so.

Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

#202

Post by DavidWoof »

threetonesun wrote: post #141
MrBrobot wrote: post #103

> Candidates tell Fortune that AI interviewers make them feel unappreciated to the point where they’d rather skip out on potential job opportunities, reasoning the company’s culture can’t be great if human bosses won’t make the time to interview them. But HR experts argue the opposite; since AI interviewers can help hiring managers save time in first-round calls, the humans have more time to have more meaningful conv…

Same argument for removing customer service with chatbots or AI. It's entirely untrue, and creates a much worse customer experience, but because people drop out your KPIs / NPS is based off of people who were willing to put up with shit to get to a real human.

Give me an AI chatbot over someone with poor English skills reading a script any day of the week. My problem probably isn't unique, it's probably something fairly obvious that was vague in the instructions.

Now, the important thing is offer a way to upgrade to a human. But I have no problem at all starting with AI, in fact I honestly prefer it.

Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

#203

Post by szszrk »

ajsnigrutin wrote: post #129
octo888 wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pre COVID, IKEA had a lot of decent value stuff (prices were low, relatively better built items too, relative to the other stock). There were also plenty of staff on the tills and on the shop floor to ask questions or get assistance. You genuinely felt they passed on the savings They also had decent online shopping. These days though they're just like everyone else and have cut cut cut and prices have risen. The rest…

> These days though they're just like everyone else and have cut cut cut and prices have risen. The restaurant has gone to crap too Aren't restaurants a totally local thing? They have vastly different offers eg in slovenia compared to italy (i visit both quite often), except for maybe hotdogs and cinnabuns... somehow the main ikea prices are different too.

Kind of. I just compared US to PL. We have much more choices here in PL, and breakfast is completely different. Meals are mostly different, but have a lot of common ingredients ( like iconic beans and meat balls). Us has no soups at all, while we have 5 kinds. Cakes are similar, but again we have much more choices.

Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

#204

Post by ndiddy »

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.

If the AI industry achieves its short-term goals, instead of paying a human $100,000/year to do some desk job, companies will pay Microsoft/Google/OpenAI/whoever $20,000/year in API tokens and keep the extra money for themselves. To me, this doesn't seem like a way to reduce wealth inequality, it seems like a way to accelerate it. Sure, there's nothing inherent to AI that makes it cause wealth inequality. However, literally every innovation in human history that allows a single worker to generate more value has caused most of that extra value to get captured by the ownership class. I don't see how AI will be any different.

Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

#205

Post by throwawayoldie »

simpaticoder wrote: post #189
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless it's a government job, the interviewers don't have guns. They just have money. Nobody said I have to talk to them.

There is an ongoing tension between the idea that our behavior is shaped by the systems around us and the belief that it stems solely from our personal choices. The truth is, it’s never one or the other exclusively - both factors play a role. Nobody says you have to eat processed food, but when 90% of the food available to you (and 100% of the inexpensive food) is processed, it's misleading to argue that eating proce…

There's a third possibility: collective action. It's easy to forget this, because the powers that be have been working hard for many decades to denigrate it.

Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

#206

Post by the__alchemist »

throwawayoldie wrote: post #169
bthrn wrote: post #125

It's funny how employers try to rationalize this -- take Coinbase, for example: https://www.coinbase.com/blog/how-coinbase-is-embracing-ai-i... > While some worry AI will dehumanize the hiring process, we believe the opposite. Deploying AI will enable more quality interactions, more quickly for the candidates who are the best fit for our jobs– without unnecessary administrative tasks or distractions. We fully believe…

"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.

This is some I've thought about more lately. It's taboo to use the word "lie" and accuse people of lying... I am attempting to use it in my vocabulary more and more, when appropriate. Which is surprisingly often.

Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

#207

Post by ttemPumpinRary »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #175
throwawayoldie wrote: post #165

Earlier 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.

Unless it's a government job, the interviewers don't have guns. They just have money. Nobody said I have to talk to them.

[dead]

Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

#208

Post by newswasboring »

shermantanktop wrote: post #193
delta_p_delta_x wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The sickle and hammer looking real interesting now.

It surprises me that the monied elite seem to have so little awareness of what happens when they keep winning.

Please give me an example of what happens.

Edit: before someone throws very strong platitudes at me again, I would like to see real-world examples. Because at least in my lifetime there have been zero consequences for people in power.

Edit 2: I've been banned from replying to this thread (lol, talk about power of the state). I guess I didn't define my acceptance criteria properly. But I thought it would be clear that the goal should be uplifting everyone not just shift the money around to someone else. That is what most of the revolutions mentioned in the replies are.

Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

#209

Post by pydry »

simpaticoder wrote: post #189
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless it's a government job, the interviewers don't have guns. They just have money. Nobody said I have to talk to them.

There is an ongoing tension between the idea that our behavior is shaped by the systems around us and the belief that it stems solely from our personal choices. The truth is, it’s never one or the other exclusively - both factors play a role. Nobody says you have to eat processed food, but when 90% of the food available to you (and 100% of the inexpensive food) is processed, it's misleading to argue that eating proce…

It's part of the american capitalist dynamic to protect capital by reframing systemic societal problems to be exclusively issues of personal responsibility.

It's largely why Americans are so, so fat compared to other nations.

Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

#210

Post by dragonwriter »

FirmwareBurner wrote: post #40
dragonwriter wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What does this have to do with what I just said? It literally directly contradicts the idea that what he is saying is, as you claim, “the truth”. > Did you see me defending their hoops or defending their honesty? Since the claim that you described as “the truth” is that product is simply an inevitability that everyone will have to deal with, defending their honesty is defending the hoops.

>It literally directly contradicts the idea that what he is saying is, as you claim, “the truth”. It's the truth from his perspective of how he runs his company and how he views the relationship with employees, not the idealist holy ground truth of how things should work. I imagined that was obvious when I made the statement with family.

It’s what he wants people to believe is the truth because he has an obvious commercial interest in them believing it and acting on that belief.
Post reply on HN