3 ms·

It's a low conversion rate, but given the return on effort is incredible. This is seems to be a good example of AI enriching/assisting with other processes.

vouaobrasil 3y ago
It doesn't really assist because it will just become an arms race between AI applications and AI filtering, which some companies have already started using. Technology makes it easier to be more anonymous, superficial, and lazy on both sides of the equation. Each side will gain a small temporary advantage with every advance in AI and the end result will be that EVERYONE will be worse off than before. That's because the job application process will be worse, people will feel more isolated, and you'll still need to spend just as much time as before if not more learning all these arcane tools. Technology is truly becoming a disease. We've taken something good and used too much of it like sugar. Everything has a happy medium, and technology used with moderation could have been something good, but its use is being pushed to its logical conclusion through these prisoner's dilemma-type situations and is resulting in a degradation of society. The people that make AI make me sick.
- moring 3y ago
  AI only highlights how ridiculous the hiring process is. A program that generates likely word sequences determines whether or not you get the job? What is even the point of that? The company looking for employees would be better off looking for people that are actually good at the job they are supposed to do there. (Unless that job is generating likely word sequences -- then they should buy AI instead of hiring people). Without AI, such a process favors potential employees that are good at writing likely word sequences themselves, and not those that are good at actually dpoing the job.
  - vouaobrasil 3y ago
    You just pointed out how RIDICULOUS technology is in this aspect. The arms race started before AI -- if people had no computers to submit resumes, they might actually have to go in and TALK to someone...
    - ahhfgshando6698 3y ago
      [dead]
    - smegger001 3y ago
      "If people had no computers..." Most of the people here are tech workers our entire industry would not exist then. Would you have us all work in the typing pool copying out letters on typewriters to snail mail?
      - vouaobrasil 3y ago
        I am sure you would find something else intellectual to tinker with.
  - JohnFen 3y ago
    > The company looking for employees would be better off looking for people that are actually good at the job they are supposed to do there. That's how most companies do it, even today. There is a special subset of companies that overautomate the hiring process, but it's not most of them (outside of SV-style companies, anyway).
- gumballindie 3y ago
  > The people that make AI make me sick. It’s as if suddenly a significant number of ai people are hell bent on spam, ip theft, putting people out of jobs, spreading fear, manipulating and gaslighting folks, and so on. Almost as if after decades of irrelevance and frustration at memes about if then else “ai” attempts they seek revenge. The tone was set by their thought leaders, in particular sam altman and the openai clique. Taking a tech that was supposed to be a force for good and turning it into a toxic charade is quite the achievement. But gradually people are starting to push back.
  - vouaobrasil 3y ago
    True...in a world where resources are slim and the world is getting more crowded, it's hard to believe that the inventors of AI wouldn't have thought that their technology would be used for a whole truckload of nefarious purposes. People like Sam Altman just go after short-term profit because they can. They are psychopathic.
JohnFen 3y ago
> This is seems to be a good example of AI enriching/assisting with other processes. It seems to me like a good example of AI making something worse for everyone involved.
- red-iron-pine 3y ago
  HR and applications are already fucking awful. and I don't care if large corps with automated ATS systems are mildly inconvenienced. Statistically, most people weren't getting hired anyway with standard, non-AI ATS systems + the Mk1 Human Eyeball. And of the hires, if you define successful hire as 2+ years in the role, most new hires fail at a rate between 50-80%[1]. Clearly not having AI is a failure. It might create tons of spam, but there is already a ton of spam, and it's miserable for everyone. [1] https://itworkforce.intersog.com/blog/why-do-50-percent-of-all-new-hires-fail-and-how-to-prevent-it.html https://itworkforce.intersog.com/blog/why-do-50-percent-of-a...
  - JohnFen 3y ago
    > I don't care if large corps with automated ATS systems are mildly inconvenienced. Neither do I. However, this use of AI harms more than just them -- it harms all other job-seekers as well. It looks to me like doing this just accelerates the race to the bottom for all.
Brian_K_White 3y ago
It helped 1 person at the expense of 5000 others who it inflicted spam on. A legit use of the power of AI might be to scan 5000 listings and present you with the 20 best fits.
- Cthulhu_ 3y ago
  Except... you don't need AI for that, search and filtering has been a thing for a long time.
  - Brian_K_White 3y ago
    You don't need AI for anything at all. The point wasn't about needing AI. It wasn't even about AI at all except as example or set dressing. You can substitute "computer" or "automation" for "AI" in my comment. The point was about "value" that is actually just external cost imposed on others.
Cthulhu_ 3y ago
I dunno, if the success rate is only half a percent it's not selling it to me. Mind you, I've never applied for a job myself, it's all gone through recruiters. This shows that that's going to continue, it's real people knowing real people, networks etc.

vouaobrasil 3y ago

It doesn't really assist because it will just become an arms race between AI applications and AI filtering, which some companies have already started using. Technology makes it easier to be more anonymous, superficial, and lazy on both sides of the equation. Each side will gain a small temporary advantage with every advance in AI and the end result will be that EVERYONE will be worse off than before. That's because the job application process will be worse, people will feel more isolated, and you'll still need to spend just as much time as before if not more learning all these arcane tools. Technology is truly becoming a disease. We've taken something good and used too much of it like sugar. Everything has a happy medium, and technology used with moderation could have been something good, but its use is being pushed to its logical conclusion through these prisoner's dilemma-type situations and is resulting in a degradation of society. The people that make AI make me sick.

moring 3y ago
AI only highlights how ridiculous the hiring process is. A program that generates likely word sequences determines whether or not you get the job? What is even the point of that? The company looking for employees would be better off looking for people that are actually good at the job they are supposed to do there. (Unless that job is generating likely word sequences -- then they should buy AI instead of hiring people). Without AI, such a process favors potential employees that are good at writing likely word sequences themselves, and not those that are good at actually dpoing the job.
- vouaobrasil 3y ago
  You just pointed out how RIDICULOUS technology is in this aspect. The arms race started before AI -- if people had no computers to submit resumes, they might actually have to go in and TALK to someone...
  - ahhfgshando6698 3y ago
    [dead]
  - smegger001 3y ago
    "If people had no computers..." Most of the people here are tech workers our entire industry would not exist then. Would you have us all work in the typing pool copying out letters on typewriters to snail mail?
    - vouaobrasil 3y ago
      I am sure you would find something else intellectual to tinker with.
- JohnFen 3y ago
  > The company looking for employees would be better off looking for people that are actually good at the job they are supposed to do there. That's how most companies do it, even today. There is a special subset of companies that overautomate the hiring process, but it's not most of them (outside of SV-style companies, anyway).
gumballindie 3y ago
> The people that make AI make me sick. It’s as if suddenly a significant number of ai people are hell bent on spam, ip theft, putting people out of jobs, spreading fear, manipulating and gaslighting folks, and so on. Almost as if after decades of irrelevance and frustration at memes about if then else “ai” attempts they seek revenge. The tone was set by their thought leaders, in particular sam altman and the openai clique. Taking a tech that was supposed to be a force for good and turning it into a toxic charade is quite the achievement. But gradually people are starting to push back.
- vouaobrasil 3y ago
  True...in a world where resources are slim and the world is getting more crowded, it's hard to believe that the inventors of AI wouldn't have thought that their technology would be used for a whole truckload of nefarious purposes. People like Sam Altman just go after short-term profit because they can. They are psychopathic.

JohnFen 3y ago

> This is seems to be a good example of AI enriching/assisting with other processes. It seems to me like a good example of AI making something worse for everyone involved.

red-iron-pine 3y ago
HR and applications are already fucking awful. and I don't care if large corps with automated ATS systems are mildly inconvenienced. Statistically, most people weren't getting hired anyway with standard, non-AI ATS systems + the Mk1 Human Eyeball. And of the hires, if you define successful hire as 2+ years in the role, most new hires fail at a rate between 50-80%[1]. Clearly not having AI is a failure. It might create tons of spam, but there is already a ton of spam, and it's miserable for everyone. [1] https://itworkforce.intersog.com/blog/why-do-50-percent-of-all-new-hires-fail-and-how-to-prevent-it.html https://itworkforce.intersog.com/blog/why-do-50-percent-of-a...
- JohnFen 3y ago
  > I don't care if large corps with automated ATS systems are mildly inconvenienced. Neither do I. However, this use of AI harms more than just them -- it harms all other job-seekers as well. It looks to me like doing this just accelerates the race to the bottom for all.

Brian_K_White 3y ago

It helped 1 person at the expense of 5000 others who it inflicted spam on. A legit use of the power of AI might be to scan 5000 listings and present you with the 20 best fits.

Cthulhu_ 3y ago
Except... you don't need AI for that, search and filtering has been a thing for a long time.
- Brian_K_White 3y ago
  You don't need AI for anything at all. The point wasn't about needing AI. It wasn't even about AI at all except as example or set dressing. You can substitute "computer" or "automation" for "AI" in my comment. The point was about "value" that is actually just external cost imposed on others.

Cthulhu_ 3y ago

I dunno, if the success rate is only half a percent it's not selling it to me. Mind you, I've never applied for a job myself, it's all gone through recruiters. This shows that that's going to continue, it's real people knowing real people, networks etc.