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

491–496 of 496 posts

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

#491

Post by ncr100 »

ejpir wrote: post #127
hunterpayne wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"That is not how it works here." Right, how it works in Europe is there are just no jobs or economic growth at all. Works great for those late in their career who have jobs and basically can't be fired. Not so much for anyone younger though. Better hope your employer doesn't go out of business before you retire. Better hope your government doesn't go bankrupt before you die. Stop injecting politics into a non-politic…

https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php... pretty much contradicts anything you said.

Hah - excellent citation, thank you ejpir for affirming and reinforcing the fact-based truth.

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

#492

Post by y1n0 »

kermatt wrote: post #165
y1n0 wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your loss. Potentially. I wouldn't judge a company by the HR department. Unless you are applying for an HR job, naturally. I'd see this as something you can hack to get to level 2. Assuming you are interested in the company. I wouldn't let this sort of thing put me off of something I wanted.

If company culture means anything, then the first impression set by HR matters.

HR is the enemy within, not a part of the whole.

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

#493

Post by dennis_jeeves2 »

nicbou wrote: post #271
dice wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm hiring at a small company and it's a nightmare. 1,000+ applicants for a software engineering position and we have essentially no help from recruiting. I'm filtering based on keywords, giving each resume a max of 90 seconds, and anything that even slightly seems off gets rejected. I only have the bandwidth to talk to a couple 10s of candidates since I have the entire rest of my job to do, so I can see the appeal o…

I used a simple “tell me what you had for breakfast” line to filter out people who don’t read. It required no work from the applicant but filtered out some of the spam. I wonder if an AI-resistant version could be made.

>I used a simple “tell me what you had for breakfast” line to filter out people who don’t read.

Seems like a good screening. Atleast it's better than - "what are your accomplishments.?"

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

#494

Post by resize2996 »

garciasn wrote: post #176
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 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…

I found a good cat-sitter through Rover and would do crime if she made it a condition of her next visit.

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

#495

Post by radarsat1 »

Something I want to add to the discussion is that the only time I've encountered this was not with a specific company but with an "AI recruitment agency", which I'm seeing getting more and more popular.

And while I get the idea of an agency handling hiring, what bothered me is that the terms of the AI interview were that it was relatively standardized for a given role, and that they would record it and put it on file to show to other companies, with the selling point being: do well in one interview and we'll shop your profile around for you!

Which is.. great if you do well I guess, but.. really unsettling if you don't. I mean, there was zero information that you'd be able to do it over, no advance details of the format, no practice session. So if you fail, or stammer, or get surprised by some detail of some question.. what, you're just "on file" now, out of reach for their entire client portfolio?

At least if you're doing it one company at a time, you mess up, then ok you move on and try again somewhere else. But the idea of making some random mistake (which happens all the time!) just blacklists you for some unknown number of companies, forever..

No way, that's too high stakes. I noped out.

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

#496

Post by aakresearch »

tveita wrote: post #325
ashraymalhotra wrote: post #17

I would love help from the community on what the best solution for hiring is. Sharing a real example I am going through -> * A single LinkedIn post about a job I was hiring for got me 300+ candidates in a single day. I am sure if I went through the channels, I would have 1000+ candidates for a single role (assuming 1000 in this example). * There are candidates that I think might be great for the role, who I will do o…

Sure, for instance, if all of them go through an 1 hour AI interview, then you might find a better candidate, at the cost of 1000 man-hours of work. You hire that person, another company opens a position, gets 999 applicants, send them all their own AI interview, and so forth. How much would better would your hire be considering that you managed to check all 1000 of them, rather than just 50? Assume that candidate fi…

Agree. Your post mirrors surprisingly well with mine of last year [0] - did you, by chance, happened to come across it? I said "you’d likely get approximately the same quality of candidates from a randomly selected 50 out of 5,000". And the main idea I was trying to convey is parallel to yours too: companies, consciously or not, try to find "the best candidate", while using completely inadequate "hiring funnel" approach. If that is their genuine need, they would be better off with "headhunting" approach. And the whole industry, businesses and candidates alike, would be better off if businesses recognize that the difference between "best" and "second best", or even "third best" is not meaningful (outside of C-suite) and not worth exponentially higher spend.

- [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45271736 (believe it or not, em-dashes are all mine, even though I regret now putting my original draft through LLM - even if it was for grammar-check only)

Post reply on HN