Live data from Hacker News

Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

fortune.com

401–410 of 918 posts

Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

#401
post #364

Earlier 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.

Norway s sovereign fund seems like one instance.

Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

#402

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We (the US) had a very successful, carefully designed system that seems to have been an unstable configuration. It was neither hammer and sickle nor single megacorporation: it was balanced on a hill between both. The combination of (1) checks and balances, (2) separation of money, religion, corporation, and government, and (3) regulation in moderation worked pretty well for around 200 years. Monopolies and labor abus…

> Monopolies and labor abuses were mostly in check Really? Transatlantic slavery by far the biggest labour abuse, then the company towns, then Standard Oil which was allowed to run amok for 30 years then broken up (which then consolidated into ExxonMobil and Chevron again). These are just off the top of my head. The US from my point of view has been a puritanical, borderline genocidal, enslaving, cowardly and hypocri…

> The US from my point of view has been a puritanical, borderline genocidal

"Borderline"?

Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

#403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't ever let anyone brainwash you into thinking we don't have the money and guns either.

I don’t think ai interviews warrant gun violence.

Ferdinand didn't warrant WWI on his own, either. There's straws that break a camel's back. Not saying AI interviews are THE straw, but I am telling you to act less surprised about whatever the straw ends up being.

Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

#404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The sickle and hammer looking real interesting now.

Because you fancy a tyrannical dictatorship that will likely kill tens of millions of its own citizens? Do you have no historical knowledge at all? Do you just not know that, every time the "sickle and hammer" are tried, it ends in oppression, deep poverty, and mass killings?

That's a pretty weak inductive argument. To substantiate it, you'd need to look at the actual causes of that apparent connection. In doing so, you'd likely find that the connection is nowhere near as directly causal as you seem to be imagining.

After all, China has been following a market-based variation on a communist one-party state for quite some time. While it's certainly not the freest country in the world, today's US has started to lose any ability to claim a moral high ground by comparison (and arguably, past US couldn't either.)

Your perspective may be one mostly borne of indoctrination.

Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

#405

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…

Correct, and the second subtext is that every company using one of these is actually filtering for desperation, not talent. So these companies are actually screwing themselves

Think about it: if you’re talented, why would you ever put up with this bullshit?

I hired for my team this year and I read every single one of the hundreds of applications. HR was experimenting with an AI recommendation software which missed a ton of quality candidates, one of which was the one I hired. Everyone loves them and they’ve been a huge boost to the team. And I think we had an easier time courting them because they saw how much work their future manager was putting into finding a great fit.

If you use this kind of software to hire, you are the loser. The good talent doesn’t need you—it’s the other way around.

Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

#406
I would never.

I would never do such an interview. But I would absolutely never ever work for a company that doesn't value people enough to even have a real conversation with them. Sure "it saves hiring managers time" but that's literally their job and it's absolutely weird to view that as "time wasted". It's "time well spent to find a perfect candidate". Tells me everything I need to know about your company.

You're talking about people you're going to work with. You can't even take the time to talk to them? You're going to let some robot do that and potentially let it dismiss a great candidate because of a glitch? Absolutely weird. I hate this timeline.

Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

#407

Earlier quoted context omitted.

100 million deaths, for the record.

Notice it was the capitalist ccountries that kept a running death count for socialist counties. Pray tell, how many people in capitalist countries died due to capitalism? None of them! It was always the individuals' responsibility! /sarcasm (Aside: we know just from the lack of access and $84k for Solvaldi alone is causing 5 million dead per year, and rising. And that's just a single hepatitis drug. And that's not ev…

There absolutely is a difference between people that die because we, as a species, cannot afford to spend the combined sum of all of our productivity on health care (which means that you will have to tell some people "no", even though they will die as a result of that), and a tyrannical dictator specifically ordering the death of people because they are a political threat to him.

Maybe you feel that a pill that costs a few bucks to produce should be sold for that same price. In that case I'd like to remind you that in this case, a private company spent BILLIONS on medical research, without knowing if any of it would ever pay off. If you just take their one succesful product and distribute it for free, they won't bother trying again.

How many great medicins came out of communist countries?

Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

#408
post #125

It'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…

> Let’s face it: the candidates who want to work at Coinbase are as enthusiastic about AI as we are. They, like us, are optimistic about the future of this (and all) technology. Yet Anthropic didn't want people to use AI as part of interviewing for them.

Exactly. A good interview process is marked by minimising the asymmetry. You're two parties getting to know each other, with the aim of working out a mutually beneficial deal.

If I'm not allowed a level ground, I will not play.

Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

#409
Job-seekers are also guilty of this type of thing. I interviewed a candidate for a cyber security position, and it became painfully clear by the end that I was just talking to a ChatGPT proxy the entire time. He wouldn't remember key concepts or technologies when asked, only to "remember" a few minutes later and give a stellar response to the original question. It's an AI arms race... I'm inclined to just regress back to in-person interviews, paper resumes delivered by-hand, etc.

Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

#410

I actually don’t mind the idea of AI conducting short 5-minute candidate screens that respect a candidate’s time, but full-on AI interviews are insulting and disrespectful of a candidate’s time.

Why? They can't read my CV? Send me an email if you need clarifications. Don't waste my time trying to appeal to a bot.
Post reply on HN