341–350 of 918 posts
As they should (be dodging AI interviews). There must be some way to sabotage these things. Maybe setup an AI agent to talk to their AI agent. Automate to target applying to companies that are doing this. Give them a taste of their own medicine.
What's stopping me from using my own AI to answer their questions?
Take this entire paragraph and read carefully, and it explains how to kill this trend: > “The truth is, if you want a job, you’re gonna go through this thing,” Adam Jackson, CEO and founder of Braintrust, a company that distributes AI interviewers, tells Fortune. “If there were a large portion of the job-seeking community that were wholesale rejecting this, our clients wouldn’t find the tool useful… This thing would…
Why is it even necessary to be an interview ? If the computer is used to generate a summary anyway, why not do it via email with one or two follow ups?
I'm guessing that's a big part of what the AI is assessing here.
> Why is it even necessary to be an interview?
I do think this question is an important one at this point: is companies fielding mountains of resumes and trying to parse them in an automated way the best way for the humans and the company?
If the goal is "get a qualified candidate" (with as little waste as possible), we feel very far from that.
> “The truth is, if you want a job, you’re gonna go through this thing,” Adam Jackson, CEO and founder of Braintrust, a company that distributes AI interviewers, tells Fortune. “If there were a large portion of the job-seeking community that were wholesale rejecting this, our clients wouldn’t find the tool useful… This thing would be chronically underperforming for our clients. And we’re just not seeing that—we’re se…
Why should AIs be any different from human interviewers in this respect?
It wouldn't be much extra effort for humans to give a little feedback, but this typically isn't done.
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.
Take this entire paragraph and read carefully, and it explains how to kill this trend: > “The truth is, if you want a job, you’re gonna go through this thing,” Adam Jackson, CEO and founder of Braintrust, a company that distributes AI interviewers, tells Fortune. “If there were a large portion of the job-seeking community that were wholesale rejecting this, our clients wouldn’t find the tool useful… This thing would…
I don't read that. I read that at best few will boycott but the majority plays along.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In my experience, candidates who demand equivalent face time always underestimate how much time is spent selecting candidates, reviewing resumes, scheduling interviews, preparing the interview structure, reviewing interviews, advocating for candidates to progress, getting their offers approved, dealing with HR, and the countless other things that go into getting someone from the application phase to being hired. If y…
The candidate also has their share of non-face time: Grinding leetcode and filling out HTML forms that are asking for the same information contained on their resume.
Perhaps I can get more efficient with my time, but as you said, the process is naturally inefficient as it stands already.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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, li…
If you prefer to be subject to the ownership class, I recommend being honest about why that is.