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

Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

fortune.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

791–800 of 918 posts

Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

#791

Post by notJim »

chickenzzzzu wrote: post #758
notJim wrote: post #752

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're still missing it, we are not in a deadlock. Developed countries are in fact decarbonizing. China too is decarbonizing, though they're behind where the West is, but their goal is to peak their emissions by 2030. In fact, it's kind of the opposite of what you say—everyone is contributing fractionally to the solution . This is what climate doomers miss.

Ok, so your opinion is that in X number of years, we may well hit some new level of decarbonization where we have severely contained or reversed the effects of climate change and so on, thanks to a relatively decentralized cooperation between all countries, even historical bad actors. My position is that that is all theatre, that even if we do achieve that it will be temporary (nth industrial revolution, nuclear war,…

I mean, if you're that fatalistic, why worry about AI (or even climate change) in particular? If we're all just doomed no matter what, you may as well just enjoy what you can from life and not stress too much about any particular development.

Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

#792

Post by RugnirViking »

remyp wrote: post #662
dfxm12 wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is an AI interview going to glean that it can't already from a resume? The power imbalance is already so far tipped to the employer side. This verbiage doesn't even consider the applicant a human with time worth saving or worth having meaningful conversations!

Gleaning information isn't the goal; whittling down deluge of applicants is. For the company, candidate time is free and manager time is massively expensive. The AI tools are cheaper than hiring more HR staff, so companies buy them lest they be haunted by the ghost of Milton Friedman. Anybody who has been on the hiring side post-GPT knows why these AI tools are getting built: people and/or their bots are blind-applyi…

> candidate time is free and manager time is massively expensive

This is a naive view of the proceedings. Why not hire literally the first person that applies? That would reduce your cost even further.

The point is to figure out who would be good at making you money. The question is, does an ai chatbot wasting your prospective candidates time make you more, or less, likely to find people good at that? Perhaps it reduces the amount of cost reviewing applications, but I imagine it also drives away a good number of the better candidates, those that have more options, away. If you're cutting corners and cost this much, why are you even hiring? surely the point of the exercise is looking towards future growth.

Naturally, there is also a limit to that line of thinking also - spending weeks reviewing each one of the ten thousand applications to your junior developer role wouldn't be the most efficient way to grow. But surely there are better filtering methods you can think of than this, which is imo the equivalent of planning on reducing the number of candidates by lining them up in a room for hours in sweltering heat and hurling verbal abuse at them until only a couple of the wretched ones without a shred of dignity are left

Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

#793

Post by [deleted] »

atoav wrote: post #714
econnors wrote: post #548

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Can you clarify what you mean by interface?" is the right answer

As someone who interviewed people for technical roles, I'd see that as a bad sign and answer: "Just tell me what you can think about." This isn't school where teachers give you trick questions and you fail if you misunderstand it. If you are applying as a software developer and you can't talk at length about various forms of interfaces you are probably not very experienced. UI, API, ABI are all interfaces..

[deleted]

Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

#794

Post by prawn »

Jare wrote: post #688
econnors wrote: post #548

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Can you clarify what you mean by interface?" is the right answer

If you're not a Junior and that's all you have to say without even attempting to approach the actual question, you would be raising a red flag with me. Maybe there are better ways to phrase that counter-question, but this one in particular made me twitch. In my experience, outlining one or a few things you call interfaces would be a much better display of both knowledge and attitude: GUI, API, interface keyword or co…

Possible alternative phrasing - "That might depend on the context. Is there a particular context you had in mind or did you want me to answer in a very broad sense?"

Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

#795

Post by os2warpman »

bluecalm wrote: post #560
os2warpman wrote: post #535

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Guns are useless. Everyone who believes guns are some kind of savior or last-ditch protector is fucking stupid. There is a reason why, during westward expansion, the first thing towns did when they got two nickels to rub together to buy bricks to build a church was ban guns. There are so many real-world examples of guns being useless that it defies logic and belief that people cling to the myth. There are so few exam…

The idea is that guns are useful because it makes pacifying the population more difficult. If it's the coup or something your own army may not be willing to trade fire with civilian groups but may still be willing to engage in.softer subduing efforts like arrests, water cannons, etc. It's rich to call people stupid when you're missing the obvious point while engaging in a fantasy of all out war between civilians with…

I am not engaging in fantasy.

“But we have guns” is fantasy.

Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

#798

Post by johncole »

belter wrote: post #351

Skip AI only interviews, blacklist firms that use them. Opaque algorithms will reject you for race, gender, age, then will give you zero feedback. It shows a signal of a “people are costs” culture a la Amazon. Your data becomes their training set. Video, voice, and text will be stored indefinitely and reused, with flimsy privacy safeguards.

How do you blacklist them? Anyone started a list of firms that do this?

Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

#799

Post by protocolture »

I have always found the best approach to job seeking was to try and find the roles where you are interacting directly with the team thats hiring. Every level of abstraction between myself and the team reduced the quality of the role, not to mention the interview process.

Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

#800

Post by pavlus »

strbean wrote: post #527
Balgair wrote: post #522

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait, how does this thing work? Can't you just vibe-code your way through it? Genuinely curious on your thoughts on this idea here.

They're probably using a platform that lets you replay the entire development session (see the pace of typing into a web IDE, what files they are looking at, etc.). Applicants will have to work pretty hard to fake natural-looking input of AI-generated code.

I would instantly fail it, because I'd go and solve it in some scratch file in IDE, and then paste it there.
Post reply on HN