11–20 of 190 posts
Easy then. Apply N times, each time with a resume generated by a different LLM. No human is going to notice anyway. Or add a N+1 resume written by yourself in which you describe your strategy, just in case.
Further de-duplication is rather easy, and will likely see you black-listed by competant organisations.
Easy then. Apply N times, each time with a resume generated by a different LLM. No human is going to notice anyway. Or add a N+1 resume written by yourself in which you describe your strategy, just in case.
Easy then. Apply N times, each time with a resume generated by a different LLM. No human is going to notice anyway. Or add a N+1 resume written by yourself in which you describe your strategy, just in case.
Do you really believe no human is going to read your resume at some point in the process and notice the classic AI tells? Further de-duplication is rather easy, and will likely see you black-listed by competant organisations.
Each model likely has its own biases in terms of what constitutes correct corporate speak, and it chooses the resumes that best fit this. Ultimately, I suspect it's more a function of model saying "this grammer, syntax structure, and formatting is most aligned with what is correct corporate language, so flag as high quality".
When I was looking for my next role after being laid off, I didn’t get much of a response with my human handmade resume despite my experience
Just for kicks, I asked ChatGPT to “Analyze my resume and give it a score for what percentage it was in” then I asked it to revise it to make it score as high as possible
I still tweaked and fact checked it but after I started sending that out, I got a much higher hit rate than before
But who knows, maybe the market changed, was a better time of year, etc
I still had to pass interviews and prove my worth. But it probably helped me get my foot in the door
Easy then. Apply N times, each time with a resume generated by a different LLM. No human is going to notice anyway. Or add a N+1 resume written by yourself in which you describe your strategy, just in case.
Companies are using AI / LLMs to pre-filter resumes. These AIs prefer their own slop resumes. Not just human vs LLMs, but Claude prefers Claude resumes over ChatGPT. Nothing good can come out of that, when resumes are pre-filtered like that.
Unless, of course, you’re not being serious and just trying to be edgy on HN.
Human when preparing a CV: "Make my CV more professional"
LLM many days later presenting a report to HR: "This CV is really professional"
There's probably more to it than that of course.
But it justifies my personal policy of using a different LLM family for code review tasks than for code generation tasks. To avoid the "marking your own homework" problem.
Anecdata, sample size of one: When I was looking for my next role after being laid off, I didn’t get much of a response with my human handmade resume despite my experience Just for kicks, I asked ChatGPT to “Analyze my resume and give it a score for what percentage it was in” then I asked it to revise it to make it score as high as possible I still tweaked and fact checked it but after I started sending that out, I g…
Anecdata, sample size of one: When I was looking for my next role after being laid off, I didn’t get much of a response with my human handmade resume despite my experience Just for kicks, I asked ChatGPT to “Analyze my resume and give it a score for what percentage it was in” then I asked it to revise it to make it score as high as possible I still tweaked and fact checked it but after I started sending that out, I g…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you really believe no human is going to read your resume at some point in the process and notice the classic AI tells? Further de-duplication is rather easy, and will likely see you black-listed by competant organisations.
The only resumes that make it past the ai to a human are ai generated