I was interviewed by an AI bot for a job

Post by avidiax » Thu, Mar 12, 2026, 4:53 AM UTC

bigtunacan wrote: post #196

arctic-true wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had this experience when I was trying to find an apartment - multiple different buildings very clearly had AI-generated responses. (To all you builders out there: quick replies are great. Instant replies are suspicious.) I immediately stopped considering them as options. If you can’t be bothered to have a human respond to my email when I’m trying to give you my money, what level of service can I expect once I’m alr…

A delayed response doesn’t mean it’s not automated, just that it wasn’t built to not feel automated. I worked on an automated reply system like this previously and we had intentional delays with randomness as well as variance in our responses to make it “feel more human”.

Post by marijan_div » Thu, Mar 12, 2026, 4:55 AM UTC

Post by autoexec » Thu, Mar 12, 2026, 5:22 AM UTC

rk06 wrote: post #209

JohnFen wrote: post #2

> If your potential employer is dehumanizing you before you’re on the payroll, how will they treat you once hired? For me, this is the key point. If a company can't even be bothered to show up for my interview -- when everyone is trying to put their best foot forward -- that bodes very ill for how I'll be treated if I were to work there.

I think this is a bit unreasonable. there are a lot of people applying to every job post. if a company can use AI to better filter the candidates, then it is an improvement. there is issue only if AI is encoded with human bias, but treated as neutral and impartial judge

Post by vaginaphobic » Thu, Mar 12, 2026, 5:29 AM UTC

Barbing wrote: post #184

garciasn wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do Rover for extra fun money and I get to watch other peoples dogs when I don’t have one myself right now. Several folks have noted that my immediate reply threw them for loops. One told me she thought it was spam that I responded so quickly. Rover has a “Star Sitter” designation and response time is one of the metrics. Star Sitters show up at the top of the algorithm’s results so I’m incentivized to keep it up. Pl…

Is this suspicious, probably: “ps— hope I hit my goal of responding in (w/biz hours mentioned in ad)

Post by vaginaphobic » Thu, Mar 12, 2026, 5:34 AM UTC

hansvm wrote: post #153

tharkun__ wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Using AI for what and is it bad or good? At this point, we think using AI and being able to use AI effectively is a skill in and of itself. When you're hired, you'll have access to AI. You'd be expected to be able to use said AI effectively. So, we still give you a FizzBuzz. You can use AI. Even if we told you not to use AI, we know almost everyone would use AI. But you have to understand the FizzBuzz and be able to…

It's been a year since I've actively given out take-homes for hiring, but I'm not sure I agree that everyone will use AI. I designed half the questions to be impossible for current-gen AI to answer without the candidate actually knowing what's going on [0], and only ~1% of candidates who responded did poorly on that half and not the other half (and, if we're worried about LLMs being better than I think, not all that…