2 ms·

I think it's a result of the cost of technical testing reducing to a negligible amount, and then as you say, an unhealthy relationship with risk aversion. If an

I think it's a result of the cost of technical testing reducing to a negligible amount, and then as you say, an unhealthy relationship with risk aversion. If any company can open a funnel to the entire timezone or world and put everyone through a HackerRank test they bought off the shelf, they have sunk no real cost by the time they interview someone and potentially no shortage of people who'll go through with it. This is proven out by how little of a signal these cost-of-entry tests apparently provide, because they go on to do other tests anyway, and inevitably reject candidates who passed all of them for any reason they can come up with.

version_five 5y ago
> I think it's a result of the cost of technical testing reducing to a negligible amount This is a good point that I overlooked and definitely agree is also present. The same thing is happening with other types of interviews - I have seen companies hiring now where the candidate is asked to record video answers to prompted question, that from what I remember are evaluated by some kind of machine learning. They can open up the funnel without having to do anything (except forgo candidates that either have some self respect or are not desperate for work)
- brailsafe 5y ago
  Yes, absolutely. I've bumped into literally random people out in the world, outside of tech, who have experienced and complained (unprompted) about those creepy AI interviews and they find it dystopian. I've been asked at least 3 times to do a similar thing, and every time I've just refused, it's a few steps too far for me to even participate in, even though I am almost completely out of options at this point.