> 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…
Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers
531–540 of 918 posts
Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers
#532It'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…
Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers
#533Earlier 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.
What is the point of numbers if there is no unity? Since Covid, there are decent successes in forming unions and collective bargaining, but it is nowhere enough. How many IT workers (as an example) have unionized or even have positive opinions on unions? A handful of guys can effectively rule large groups of people for a long period of time, if the said large group can't unite, can't help each other.
Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers
#534Earlier quoted context omitted.
> We (the US) had a very successful, carefully designed system The idea that it was "very successful" basically comes from ignoring things like the Civil War, and the idea that it was "carefully designed" comes from building a fiction around the output and ignoring the process that actually produced it (in no small part aided by people viewing the after-the-drafting sales campaign of the Federalist Papers as if it re…
the current us capitalist system is essentially a post-civil war system... considering the us started as a wartorn backwater in 1860 and wound up as the dominant nation in world by 1950 says something.
Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers
#535Earlier 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.
Don't ever let anyone brainwash you into thinking we don't have the money and guns either.
Everyone who believes guns are some kind of savior or last-ditch protector is fucking stupid.
There is a reason why, during westward expansion, the first thing towns did when they got two nickels to rub together to buy bricks to build a church was ban guns.
There are so many real-world examples of guns being useless that it defies logic and belief that people cling to the myth.
There are so few examples of guns being useful that those examples are the irrelevant exceptions to the norm.
Every single valley in Afghanistan has a small village along the valley stream where every household has at least one automatic rifle. That is what a society saturated with weaponry looks like: paranoid, tribal, and rapey.
In the US, the second "the good guys" show up with their AR and wish.com tacticool gear and start to pose any actual threat, the bad guys will retreat behind fortified walls and fences and start dropping JDAMs.
Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers
#536Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's what's so incredibly stupid about the tariffs, immigration crackdowns, etc. Life is not a zero-sum game, and treating it like it is just makes it worse for everyone - unless you're the sort of person who really gets off on having other suffer worse than you.
What society or culture survived by taking the high road? I'm reminded of Princess Leia's quote: No! Alderaan is peaceful, we have no weapons.
Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers
#537Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers
#538Earlier quoted context omitted.
Chinese socialism is interesting and I think works quite well. Absolutely new stuff is basically unrestricted. Go build, have fun, make money. Intermediate stuff is partially state controlled, including cost, profits, pollution, and more. Essentials are effectively state owned, cost controlled, and 'very stable'. Also, the USSR was the first time it was tried. It succeeded some ways, but failed in others.
It works quite well in China, assuming of course you are not so unlucky as to want to protest on Tienanmen Square. Or have useful organs someone higher up might want to harvest. Or are an Uygur. Or a Tibetan. Or live in a place downstream of a large dam. Or want to express an opinion. Oh, and you know how Nazi Germany was the first time that Nazism was tried as well? It also succeeded in some ways, and failed in othe…
Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers
#539Earlier 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.
What is the point of numbers if there is no unity? Since Covid, there are decent successes in forming unions and collective bargaining, but it is nowhere enough. How many IT workers (as an example) have unionized or even have positive opinions on unions? A handful of guys can effectively rule large groups of people for a long period of time, if the said large group can't unite, can't help each other.
Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers
#540I 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…
I'd hate being interviewed by a bot. Talking to these stupid automated answering machines is bad enough. That said, the other side of the equation is also bad, for employers. I was asked to conduct some interviews recently. I asked the most basic of questions (like absolutely basic stuff, "what is an interface?" level basic). The number of people who said "I don't know" is far less than the number of people who tried…
My thought process was:
Well, most of the code I use uses a Reverse Communication Interface. But, I think these are pretty old-school projects, maybe I should start by talking about the Object Oriented interface to the library that we recently did. Or maybe I can talk about the file IO based interface that I did, it was extremely cursed but kind of funny. Wait, oh shit, is this about UI?