“This is the #AI Grey Goo scenario: an internet choked with low-quality content, which never improves, where it's almost impossible to locate public reliable sources for information because the tools we have been able to rely on in the past – Google, social media – can never keep up with the scale of new content being created. Where the volume of content created overwhelms human or algorithmic abilities to sift through it quickly & find high-quality stuff.”
@corycarson@harold
Just this week #linkedIn offered me the chance to use #GAI to respond to a #recruiter, who had presumably also been offered the chance to use GAI to create the job post in the first place.
If by that end of 2024 the majority of hiring decisions are being made on the basis of what my AI said, or didn't say to your #AI, we are all in deep shit...
@hacks4pancakes Did not happen this week, but was very funny nevertheless.
German #Recruiter writes, proposes an IT project that is not-too-far away from my skillset, but stumbles before the finish line with his closing remark.
He meant to write "Auf Ihre Bewerbung freue ich mich" ("I am looking forward to your application"), but actually wrote "Auf Ihre Beerbung freue ich mich" ("I am looking forward to inheriting from you")
Do you also receive questions under your #LinkedIn posts which sound like, as if a #recruiter is trying to collect a "reference" answer from you, an expert in your field? They seem to read the post, but their questions still sound like #BS. A strange kind of #outsourcing 😉
Dear LinkedIn recruiters - If you have a 3 mo contract, and I say "No thanks, I'm looking for full time" this is not the correct response to me:
"That said, you have been out of work roughly X months now and the holidays are around the corner, hiring will start to slow down as we go into Q4. Not a bad stop gap and then look for your next FTE in early 2024."
I am well aware of exactly how long, and I'm loving every minute of it. Seriously.
If you're a #recruiter please stop confusing understanding or proclivity to agree for good communication.
"We won't be going further with you as a candidate; you aren't very good at communicating, the conversation did not flow"
'Ok, what do you mean by that?'
"It was hard to get answers from you for easy-to-understand questions"
'I didn't find them easy to understand; and I outlined for you why it was hard. Your colleague asked a much better question - which I was able to answer immediatley, and told you what you were looking to know'
"See, I get the feeling you're trying to teach me something. I've done this 1-200 times, I'm not new at it - it's still not flowing"
'I get the feeling you just want me to agree - now you understand why I had difficulty with the question, I communucated that effectivley to you right?'
"Yes"
'and wouldn't you say it's better communication that we establish a mutual understanding so that I can give you an accurate answer, instead of a confident guess at something I think you'll like?'
"No"
...wtf? Can anyone explain why that's not a good thing? Why someone would prefer a guess?
Are we sure they're even clever enough to think of that?
Far more than half of the recruiting emails I get these days either mandate 5+ years in tools/etc that are not present on my resume at all, 10+ years of things that have only existed for a year or two, or demand on-location work in a country other than my own and for which I would need a hard-to-get work visa.
"Never lie on your resume," say recruiters who mark jobs listings as "remote" when they require three days a week in the office, or use LinkedIn's "Easy Apply" feature and then email candidates who apply a link to the REAL (not easy) application in their own applicant tracking system.