Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I was interviewed by an AI bot for a job

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 496 posts

Re: I was interviewed by an AI bot for a job

#231

Post by ssl-3 »

shakehar wrote: post #207
AnotherGoodName wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The electrical panel beeps an alarm constantly. Sent an email to the property management company. Guy comes over and presses a button to silence it for 24 hours. Rinse repeat for months on end. No method of escalation beyond the automatic replying inbox. I’m fine. twitch twitch Welcome to 21st century distopia!

Call your fire department on their non emergency line and report this.

Called the fire department's non-emergency line. Got a bot. The bot sent out someone who said the noise isn't a safety issue, and left.

Called the police department's non-emergency line. Got a bot that told me it's a civil problem and that there's nothing they can do.

Scouted out the fire department and chatted up the fire chief in person while he was walking back in after lunch. He was very concerned about all of this (finally, progress!) and called the management company while we stood there, but his call was answered by a bot that said someone would be out in less than 24 hours to silence the noise again.

[...]

Re: I was interviewed by an AI bot for a job

#233

Post by 9rx »

altruios wrote: post #52
roenxi wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Resource allocation is entirely a social construct. Not being afford something is a 'pretend' state that only exists because everyone agrees to go along with it. That can't exactly be true, because scarcity is a physical limit. If there is exactly 1 apple, it is impossible for 2 people to eat it. That is no social construct. There is a large social element involved, but that in itself is done in such a way as to tr…

I hear and understand your point. It is not purely a social construct. But how much available farmland to allocate to grow food from the available farmland becomes a political issue. Pricing, distribution... same deal. And considering our (humanity's) food production outmatches our total food calorie/nutrition requirements... any argument using food as an example for scarcity indicates that you may be working with in…

> It is not purely a social construct.

What else is involved? Despite the inane ramblings of the parent comment, scarcity isn't actually a factor. Allocation occurs because of scarcity. Without scarcity, there is no such thing as allocation. It is the reason for why resource allocation exists entirely a social construct.

Re: I was interviewed by an AI bot for a job

#234

Post by csa »

arctic-true wrote: post #16
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 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…

> 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 already obligated to pay rent?

I will go out on a limb and suggest that they are probably happy that you’ve self-selected out of the process.

I’m not saying your expectations are unreasonable, but you have higher expectations than most consumers, and that ultimately becomes a pain in their ass.

Re: I was interviewed by an AI bot for a job

#235

Post by mock-possum »

laxmena wrote: post #218

If I'm being interviewed by a bot, I see no reason not to send my own bot to represent me. It levels the playing field. I’ll probably start building an AI agent to sit in these AI bot interviews

Which bot would you trust to represent you though.

Re: I was interviewed by an AI bot for a job

#236

Post by rendaw »

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 hate that it's the case, but generally the ones doing the dumb stuff during the hiring process are HR, and you'll not be interacting with them for 99% of the job once hired. Even before LLMs they were using AI and dumber applicant screening, causing people to fill their resumes with keywords.

Re: I was interviewed by an AI bot for a job

#237

Post by gleenn »

csa wrote: post #234
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…

> 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 already obligated to pay rent? I will go out on a limb and suggest that they are probably happy that you’ve self-selected out of the process. I’m not saying your expectations are unreasonable, but you have higher expectation…

I feel like it's not higher than most consumers, if I have a problem that is serious enough then that's the benefit and direct trade-off of renting - it shouldn't be my problem and my landlord should take it seriously. If everyone self-selects out we are just making the rental market even more hostile.

Re: I was interviewed by an AI bot for a job

#238

Post by roenxi »

9rx wrote: post #105
roenxi wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Resource allocation is entirely a social construct. Not being afford something is a 'pretend' state that only exists because everyone agrees to go along with it. That can't exactly be true, because scarcity is a physical limit. If there is exactly 1 apple, it is impossible for 2 people to eat it. That is no social construct. There is a large social element involved, but that in itself is done in such a way as to tr…

> That can't exactly be true, because scarcity is a physical limit. Hence resource allocation. If there were no physical limit, there would be nothing in need of allocation. Allocation is intrinsically bound to scarcity. > If there is exactly 1 apple, it is impossible for 2 people to eat it. Hence resource allocation. If there were an infinite number of apples, there would be nothing in need of allocation. Allocation…

That is quite hard to marry up with

> Not being afford something is a 'pretend' state that only exists because everyone agrees to go along with it.

though. If there are n people who want things and (n-1) things, then someone being unable to afford something isn't some pretend state. There is certainly an element of social construct in that the word we use is "afford", if we all agreed to use a different word that'd be possible. But the thing/people ratio being below one is not a social construct; and whatever you want to call it and whatever allocation scheme you want to use there will still be people who can't have one. Someone can't afford the thing.

> You being unable to afford something isn't some fundamental property of the universe.

In many cases it is. Eg, topically, how much economically extractable oil is available on earth is actually a fundamental property of the universe. Ditto most energy emasures like watts of solar energy or power from nuclear decay.

> So given that you see humans as being beyond terrible at allocating resources, why do you think, if they were relieved of having to handle resource allocation, that they would suddenly become not terrible at everything else in order to see all of those other problems magically disappear, per the contextual parent comment?

Well I suppose I don't. Although I'll admit the question is too convoluted for me to be sure of that.

Re: I was interviewed by an AI bot for a job

#239

Post by ryandrake »

Eisenstein wrote: post #174
AnotherGoodName wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The electrical panel beeps an alarm constantly. Sent an email to the property management company. Guy comes over and presses a button to silence it for 24 hours. Rinse repeat for months on end. No method of escalation beyond the automatic replying inbox. I’m fine. twitch twitch Welcome to 21st century distopia!

Whatever that panel is responsible for, that thing isn't working properly, its just set to be silent temporarily. Find out what regulatory body in your town deals with that panel's responsibility, contact them telling them that of the issue and say that you have contacted them when you submit your next ticket.

...and deal with that regulatory body's automated bot response.

Customer service is bots all the way down.

Re: I was interviewed by an AI bot for a job

#240

Post by win311fwg »

roenxi wrote: post #41
9rx wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Resource allocation is entirely a social construct. Not being afford something is a 'pretend' state that only exists because everyone agrees to go along with it. Even if a magical unicorn were to step in and start distributing resources perfectly, solving that particular problem, if humans can't even get something as simple as resource allocation right, why are you so sure they won't also screw up everything else to…

> Resource allocation is entirely a social construct. Not being afford something is a 'pretend' state that only exists because everyone agrees to go along with it. That can't exactly be true, because scarcity is a physical limit. If there is exactly 1 apple, it is impossible for 2 people to eat it. That is no social construct. There is a large social element involved, but that in itself is done in such a way as to tr…

> pretty much everyone at this point has discovered that laws and capitalism with some welfare trimmings on the edge is a much better approach than any alternative that got tried.

Have they? Aside from maybe Revolutionary Catalonia, which only stood up for a few years*, we haven't actually tried anything else since the emergence of capital. Obviously pre-neolithic humans lived under a different model, but that is because capital didn't exist yet.

The closest thing to an aberration was the USSR. Despite all the lip service paid to trying to suggest otherwise, in the end it remained under capitalism, standing out only because a small group of capitalists managed to seize control of all the capital.

* Which ironically, given what the USSR stood for on paper, fell down to war pressure from the USSR. Less ironic when you remember that the USSR was, in practice, actually most interested in capitalism for the benefit of the "elite", of course.

Post reply on HN