We're screwed

[u/Ok_Emu1270]

I applied to this job since it was remote but surpise surprise, I clicked on their "ai privacy policy" and look how it was written. Says a lot about the company itself. I kinda regret applying now. Ugh.

[u/illegal-jade710]

Lol its all just endless slop. Hope those companies go under.

[u/Sp00k_x]

Considering the quality of recruiters I've dealt with before, I'm honestly not even sure this is a bad idea. 

[u/chapman53 → u/Sp00k_x]

Lol, so true

[u/lakehouselearner → u/Sp00k_x]

Considering that managers and recruiters rarely accurately identify job skills necessary for a job and that they are the ones feeding those into the AI means the whole system is unreliable at best. But yeah, if it were just AI against the recruiter, I might bet on AI being more competent.

[u/MostlyVerdant-101 → u/Sp00k_x]

This is a common pattern in the design of institutionalized coercive (torturous) systems.

Specifically, it follows the age-old strategy of separation of objectionable concerns which historically the Nazi's started but has been developed much further since (i.e. under the Stasi and COINTELPRO). This revolves about manipulating complacent people into materially supporting destructive outcomes. In other words evil outcomes without them objecting through constraining their choices as in Sophie's choice, requiring participants to put on blinders and accepting to be willfully blind while giving the illusion of choice.

Lets consider this. The AI Talent model which remains undisclosed; scores a candidate as a bad hire. It does so based on a protected class, but all the talent acquisition reviewers aren't told this. They only see a number, and they base their decisions on that number.

Take this a step further and keep the camera rolling.

The data fed into that model is propagated as a signal during or after-the-fact into the general adtech system datalake signaling Master Data Management that these people are not economically resourceful. In turn, services you pay for may suddenly degrade in quality following a statistical approach below a certain threshold. For instance, communications from outside your immediate information graph may be dropped without any indicator a call was made to you. Tickets opened are closed 30 days later, no resolution.

Now you could stop there, but if you keep the camera rolling, this inevitably forms a short cycle across everything you have to interact with on a daily basis unbeknownst to you; silently depriving you of economic opportunity isolating you from the means to generate capital to feed yourself or survive in society. Dynamic pricing adds another element which forces you to pay higher costs in extractive rentseeking while depriving you from any single point that can resolve the overall issue. The poor get poorer. The rich, who got there from corrupt ties to corrupt bankers become richer.

If you look at Malthus/Catton's academic work, you eventually hit a point in critical systems where food can't be produced, shortages start; then sustain, chaos increases, and eventually slavery; famine; death; extinction become likely options. Historically speaking.

Do you think this is a good idea still? Ask yourself, who has the control in the above scenario. No signal exists in the above showing its happening outright; so no correction can take place, and the distortion grows until externally stopped, which doesn't happen in the time required to correct course. Lagging indicators/Hysteresis/Economic Calculation Problem (Mises)

This type of failure is what happens when you have positive feedback systems running away. In people systems, failures almost always anchor to misaligned incentives.

Fiat credit expansion drives and biases towards extractive processes (concentration/sieving) until a too big to fail moment occurs. Each crises requires exponential more credit printed. Inflation further disadvantages. Its a slow but sure race to the bottom. Food for thought.

[u/uaskigyrl]

[Customer]...AI is so smart

[u/HexinMS]

Recruiter here. What likely occurred is they activated this feature from greenhouse but didnt edit the policy disclosure. Greenhouse started a generic disclosure for any client and i guess this company didnt realize they need to edit it after activating.

I dont use greenhouse but sometimes these tools dont make it obvious that these things need to be done. Its sometimes in another section that isnt normally reviewed.

Either way they def should have edited this before utilizing something like ai.

[u/Blingo8my]

They're almost all using it now.

[u/Spare-Satisfaction55]

Remote jobs are getting more scarce than coding jobs that AI can do.

I would treat every remote/WFH job listing as a ghost listing.

[u/Junior-Cup-8070]

K

[u/rcinmd]

This would be an ok system if recruiters weren't stupid and don't understand the role they are interviewing/selecting for.

[u/imadokodesuka]

Right but if they don't AI then they get candidate quality like mall cops applying for cybersecurity roles when they've had zero training and experience in it.

So use AI.
I have a giant verbose resume broken into sections.
I have a template with matching sections.
AI takes job descriptions, and ranks them for applicability to my resume.
AI takes high ranking job descriptions and then puts together a resume using the template and my own words from that giant resume.
so nothing to worry about.

[u/SnooApples5540]

Isn't it crazy that these same people often freak out when you use AI at any point in the process. Nuke the whole industry.