Insane mental gymnastics on display here. “Let us waste your time doing nothing of value or meaning to prove how you’ll behave when given a task of value and meaning” is linkedinlunatics material.
The form are important because 90% of the applicants for a job these days aren’t remotely qualified because people shotgun resumes at a hundred jobs at once without even reading the qualifications and all their resumes are formatted differently.
I don’t have the time to go through that, so yeah - I filter out people who don’t bother to fill in the fields because they probably didn’t even read what the job is.
The fields get the resume to my desk. The resume and cover letter get you an interview, and the interview gets the job offer.
I hear about all these people sending out hundreds of job applications in every direction with no response, and it makes sense. When you’re competing against a hundred people for a job, you won’t stand out with a half-ass application. Focus on doing fewer, higher-quality applications.
Yes it would be difficult for them to access an LLM in your presence, but that would not be sufficient evidence to verify they did use AI previously. That’s just the assumption you’re making about them beforehand which colors your view of them.
I’m going to go ahead and stand by my original assessment. This nonsense belongs on a linkedinlunatics post. Adios.
The fields let me filter out whether someone meets the bare minimum at a glance in a standard format. If someone gets through that, I’ll read the resume, CV, and cover letter they prepared. If they get through that, they get an interview. If they get through that I’ll check references and make an offer.
Larger organizations take it a step further and have a computer auto-filter candidates based on the fields.
Let us waste your time doing nothing of value or meaning to prove how you’ll behave when given a task of value and meaning” is linkedinlunatics material.
I’ve had many. None of them did this to me. If they wanted to see what I could do they would put me in a real but low stakes situation with supervision and see how I performed. You’ve become accustomed to the inexcusable to the point where you’re making excuses on its behalf. I pity you.
Insane mental gymnastics on display here. “Let us waste your time doing nothing of value or meaning to prove how you’ll behave when given a task of value and meaning” is linkedinlunatics material.
The form are important because 90% of the applicants for a job these days aren’t remotely qualified because people shotgun resumes at a hundred jobs at once without even reading the qualifications and all their resumes are formatted differently.
I don’t have the time to go through that, so yeah - I filter out people who don’t bother to fill in the fields because they probably didn’t even read what the job is.
The fields get the resume to my desk. The resume and cover letter get you an interview, and the interview gets the job offer.
I hear about all these people sending out hundreds of job applications in every direction with no response, and it makes sense. When you’re competing against a hundred people for a job, you won’t stand out with a half-ass application. Focus on doing fewer, higher-quality applications.
LLMs have made that kind of thing moot for LLM users. Honest ones, not so much.
You learn to spot LLM cover letters pretty quickly. And anybody who slips by won’t survive an interview.
The paid models are quite good at writing English in a realistic way. They do have a shitton of training data and the models ate HUGE.
They still suck at doing lots of things, like writing code and listening to me. Same as frer LLMs
I’d love to see someone try and perform in an interview with ChatGPT or Claude without me noticing from the other side of the table.
With no real way to verify, you’re just guessing. Educated guessing sure, but unverifiable guesses.
If I’m physically in the room with them im the interview, I’m pretty sure I’d notice if they’re using an AI for their responses.
Yes it would be difficult for them to access an LLM in your presence, but that would not be sufficient evidence to verify they did use AI previously. That’s just the assumption you’re making about them beforehand which colors your view of them.
I’m going to go ahead and stand by my original assessment. This nonsense belongs on a linkedinlunatics post. Adios.
why would anyone bother to write something you tacitly admit you arent going to read
The fields let me filter out whether someone meets the bare minimum at a glance in a standard format. If someone gets through that, I’ll read the resume, CV, and cover letter they prepared. If they get through that, they get an interview. If they get through that I’ll check references and make an offer.
Larger organizations take it a step further and have a computer auto-filter candidates based on the fields.
Oh hey, here’s one now!
You’ve never had a job have you ?
I’ve had many. None of them did this to me. If they wanted to see what I could do they would put me in a real but low stakes situation with supervision and see how I performed. You’ve become accustomed to the inexcusable to the point where you’re making excuses on its behalf. I pity you.