6 ms·

Regarding 1, you setup a fake company and interview the candidate in multiple rounds. Record the interviews and then use them as input for deep fake. Edit: you

Regarding 1, you setup a fake company and interview the candidate in multiple rounds. Record the interviews and then use them as input for deep fake. Edit: you could also approach them as a love interest and get the video through chats. I'd also be curious to see if there's an overlapping former employer between the candidates. If you found an archive of some employers zoom meetings you have all you need. Okay I'm gonna stop before I get paranoid.

13of40 4y ago
In the second year of COVID I was hiring for a dev position and got a really good candidate who came across as a very bright, outgoing young woman, who got "hire" decisions from 4 of 4 interviewers. She worked with us for about 6 months remotely, but never turned her camera on after the interview loop, and in retrospect she seemed like a totally different person than who we interviewed. The conspiracy theorist in me says she used a double to do the interviews. No need to deep fake anyone.
- chrismarlow9 4y ago
  Interviews as a service. Interesting idea and thanks for sharing.
- tablespoon 4y ago
  One of my previous leads suspects a contractor did something like this for an in-person role. We only did one or two phone interviews for such roles, and the guy did well enough to get brought on for a 3 month contract or something. The guy who showed up didn't seem to know as much as the interviewee, and was always on the phone. My lead suspected he was getting help from "somewhere else." In retrospect, he suspects the guy who showed up may have had a different foreign-country X regional accent than the person who interviewed, but it's impossible to know for sure. He speculated that some unscrupulous but relatively knowledgeable guy was sitting in for the interviews, and then coaching the incompetent applicants day to day for a cut of their pay. In the end he just let the contract lapse. Not a whole lot you can do since it would be really hard to prove any kind of malfeasance, and to make the accusation would just make you look crazy and paranoid.
  - daniel-cussen 4y ago
    I'd rather look crazy and paranoid in that scenario than do nothing.
  - 908B64B197 4y ago
    There was a place that hired a consultant for a project a friend worked on, and she was... I don't think she could write code at all. Like, had trouble manually inserting fragments into an XML file despite fragments with the same structure already being in the file. Her productivity skyrocketed at night however, and she generally had working code in the morning, which lead to rumors that her husband or someone in her home country was doing the work (would have been daytime over there). Nobody really complained. She wore a hijab and the company had just hired it’s first “diversity officer” so maybe that’s why. Thankfully they stopped using that vendor not long after. It's a story a friend told me a long time ago. I didn’t and couldn’t fact-check it. The husband’s theory came from the fact she apparently mentioned her husband was also a software consultant.
    - rvnx 4y ago
      That's fine if people helped her after work, it means she is struggling a bit technically and she has to work after-hours to learn. It's ok. It means she is dedicated to her job but lacks some skills and is trying to learn. The result is also the most important.
      - Ancapistani 4y ago
        > That's fine if people helped her after work Depending on the industry, it's definitely not fine. I work in healthcare. If one of our employees was giving a foreign national access to our internal systems, that would be a Very Big Deal.
        Dan_Sylveste 4y ago
        I don't think any company would be even slightly 'fine' with unvetted random people having access to any of their systems, and it's almost certainly a breach of contract by the employee to give anyone else that access, whether that involves letting them login and poke around or having them look over your shoulder.
- kache_ 4y ago
  - dbetteridge 4y ago
    What an out of touch take. There's a million reasons someone may not be comfortable having their video on that don't involve fraud.
    - Nextgrid 4y ago
      Regularly, yes. But all the time? Come on.
      - tablespoon 4y ago
        > Regularly, yes. But all the time? Come on. I have literally never turned on my video despite 2+ years of working remote. None of my team has either. The only people who ever do are director-level and above. You are out of touch. Not every workplace is your workplace.
        kache_ 4y ago
        tablespoon 4y ago
        > What has your team shipped? What kind of question is that? We've shipped our deliverables. It may be surprising to you, but grainy and awkward video of coworkers in zoom shirts looking at their other monitor is not actually required for people to get things done.
        icedchai 4y ago
        This is true. Turning on the camera for video calls seemed very rare, pre-covid. We basically treated them like conference calls, with screen sharing.
- datavirtue 4y ago
  Winner!
- ProjectArcturis 4y ago
  How did she get away with never turning on her camera?
  - tjr225 4y ago
    Well, apparently "she" didn't. She was fired. The thing is, you could potentially make 40-80k(OR MORE!!!) after taxes faking it for six months. I've been thinking about this scam a lot lately. In fact, there's nothing illegal about being a shitty employee for six months which complicates things. There's definitely an opportunity here to make a bunch of money at least pretending to fix this problem. Or maybe capital just decides to bring everyone back into the office.
    - EMIRELADERO 4y ago
      Couldn't there be a case for fraud?
      - tjr225 4y ago
        I don’t know. I’m not a lawyer. But also what is stopping just any old person from doing this once or twice a year? Is being fireable fraud? I doubt it but again, I’m not a lawyer.
        Dan_Sylveste 4y ago
        In the UK it's 'obtaining a pecuniary gain by deception' the same as lying on your CV. If you're routinely outsourcing parts of your job (because you can't do it yourself) then you've met the standard for prosecution.
        filoleg 4y ago
        > If you're routinely outsourcing parts of your job (because you can't do it yourself) then you've met the standard for prosecution. I imagine it would be a problem in the US too, just for other reasons probably. You are essentially giving confidential work info to a third party that has no relationship with your employer. Not a lawyer, but I don't see a deception charge for "under-performing and getting fired for it (while having 2 jobs)" faring well in courts. Think about it: if you were performing your work well, despite having 2 jobs, what would the deception be? You promised to deliver work on your own, you deliver it on your own. The other job has no intersection with your other one, they are entirely independent. The only difference between that situation and the same situation but poor performance is literally just your performance. Poor performance doesn't automatically turn that situation into deception.

13of40 4y ago

In the second year of COVID I was hiring for a dev position and got a really good candidate who came across as a very bright, outgoing young woman, who got "hire" decisions from 4 of 4 interviewers. She worked with us for about 6 months remotely, but never turned her camera on after the interview loop, and in retrospect she seemed like a totally different person than who we interviewed. The conspiracy theorist in me says she used a double to do the interviews. No need to deep fake anyone.

chrismarlow9 4y ago
Interviews as a service. Interesting idea and thanks for sharing.
tablespoon 4y ago
One of my previous leads suspects a contractor did something like this for an in-person role. We only did one or two phone interviews for such roles, and the guy did well enough to get brought on for a 3 month contract or something. The guy who showed up didn't seem to know as much as the interviewee, and was always on the phone. My lead suspected he was getting help from "somewhere else." In retrospect, he suspects the guy who showed up may have had a different foreign-country X regional accent than the person who interviewed, but it's impossible to know for sure. He speculated that some unscrupulous but relatively knowledgeable guy was sitting in for the interviews, and then coaching the incompetent applicants day to day for a cut of their pay. In the end he just let the contract lapse. Not a whole lot you can do since it would be really hard to prove any kind of malfeasance, and to make the accusation would just make you look crazy and paranoid.
- daniel-cussen 4y ago
  I'd rather look crazy and paranoid in that scenario than do nothing.
- 908B64B197 4y ago
  There was a place that hired a consultant for a project a friend worked on, and she was... I don't think she could write code at all. Like, had trouble manually inserting fragments into an XML file despite fragments with the same structure already being in the file. Her productivity skyrocketed at night however, and she generally had working code in the morning, which lead to rumors that her husband or someone in her home country was doing the work (would have been daytime over there). Nobody really complained. She wore a hijab and the company had just hired it’s first “diversity officer” so maybe that’s why. Thankfully they stopped using that vendor not long after. It's a story a friend told me a long time ago. I didn’t and couldn’t fact-check it. The husband’s theory came from the fact she apparently mentioned her husband was also a software consultant.
  - rvnx 4y ago
    That's fine if people helped her after work, it means she is struggling a bit technically and she has to work after-hours to learn. It's ok. It means she is dedicated to her job but lacks some skills and is trying to learn. The result is also the most important.
    - Ancapistani 4y ago
      > That's fine if people helped her after work Depending on the industry, it's definitely not fine. I work in healthcare. If one of our employees was giving a foreign national access to our internal systems, that would be a Very Big Deal.
      - Dan_Sylveste 4y ago
        I don't think any company would be even slightly 'fine' with unvetted random people having access to any of their systems, and it's almost certainly a breach of contract by the employee to give anyone else that access, whether that involves letting them login and poke around or having them look over your shoulder.
kache_ 4y ago
- dbetteridge 4y ago
  What an out of touch take. There's a million reasons someone may not be comfortable having their video on that don't involve fraud.
  - Nextgrid 4y ago
    Regularly, yes. But all the time? Come on.
    - tablespoon 4y ago
      > Regularly, yes. But all the time? Come on. I have literally never turned on my video despite 2+ years of working remote. None of my team has either. The only people who ever do are director-level and above. You are out of touch. Not every workplace is your workplace.
      - kache_ 4y ago
        tablespoon 4y ago
        > What has your team shipped? What kind of question is that? We've shipped our deliverables. It may be surprising to you, but grainy and awkward video of coworkers in zoom shirts looking at their other monitor is not actually required for people to get things done.
        icedchai 4y ago
        This is true. Turning on the camera for video calls seemed very rare, pre-covid. We basically treated them like conference calls, with screen sharing.
datavirtue 4y ago
Winner!
ProjectArcturis 4y ago
How did she get away with never turning on her camera?
- tjr225 4y ago
  Well, apparently "she" didn't. She was fired. The thing is, you could potentially make 40-80k(OR MORE!!!) after taxes faking it for six months. I've been thinking about this scam a lot lately. In fact, there's nothing illegal about being a shitty employee for six months which complicates things. There's definitely an opportunity here to make a bunch of money at least pretending to fix this problem. Or maybe capital just decides to bring everyone back into the office.
  - EMIRELADERO 4y ago
    Couldn't there be a case for fraud?
    - tjr225 4y ago
      I don’t know. I’m not a lawyer. But also what is stopping just any old person from doing this once or twice a year? Is being fireable fraud? I doubt it but again, I’m not a lawyer.
      - Dan_Sylveste 4y ago
        In the UK it's 'obtaining a pecuniary gain by deception' the same as lying on your CV. If you're routinely outsourcing parts of your job (because you can't do it yourself) then you've met the standard for prosecution.
        filoleg 4y ago
        > If you're routinely outsourcing parts of your job (because you can't do it yourself) then you've met the standard for prosecution. I imagine it would be a problem in the US too, just for other reasons probably. You are essentially giving confidential work info to a third party that has no relationship with your employer. Not a lawyer, but I don't see a deception charge for "under-performing and getting fired for it (while having 2 jobs)" faring well in courts. Think about it: if you were performing your work well, despite having 2 jobs, what would the deception be? You promised to deliver work on your own, you deliver it on your own. The other job has no intersection with your other one, they are entirely independent. The only difference between that situation and the same situation but poor performance is literally just your performance. Poor performance doesn't automatically turn that situation into deception.