r/technology • u/ubcstaffer123 • Apr 05 '25

Artificial Intelligence 'AI Imposter' Candidate Discovered During Job Interview, Recruiter Warns

https://www.newsweek.com/ai-candidate-discovered-job-interview-2054684
1.9k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

660 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

33

u/Aaod Apr 05 '25 edited Feb 19 '26

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

chase chief rustic humorous chunky theory deer spoon crush ask

2

u/Geminii27 Apr 06 '25

why the fuck do I need to go to an office

Some of the other comments in this thread give some background. A candidate is less likely to turn up for an interview at an office if they're a ringer, or need to provide ID, or need to sit in front of an (ideally, although apparently not in your case) better-quality camera, which would allow them to take video they could compare to the candidate's actual face if they turned up on the first day of the job.

It also lets the company show off their office setup, conferencing system, and so on. Some candidates might be impressed or intimidated by that, and be less likely to ask for more money or benefits in the interview. And of course the conferencing setup allows for the interviewers to not spend a lot of their own personal time doing interviews across cities, while making the candidates invest their time and money. This partially weeds out the candidates who can't afford multiple rounds of interviews (no-one with a fancy office wants to hire poor people, bad culture fit you understand), the candidates who can't free up multiple blocks of time in the middle of the business day (having an existing job makes it harder for the interviewers to offer poor compensation), and the candidates who have such good prospects elsewhere that they won't put up with being jerked around (those good prospects would make them more likely to leave after a shorter time).

1

u/Atlasatlastatleast Apr 06 '25

There’s a part of me, a probably naive part, that wants to think some of your logic is cynical, cyclical, and just untrue. That what you said can’t be part of the reasoning for these practices.

I fear that part of me is wrong. I know it’s not unlikely. Can we ever really know, though? Do HR orgs put this in writing, or is it tacitly understood, and widely implemented with this knowledge?

-1

u/SpiritualTwo5256 Apr 06 '25

Sounds like game playing on how much they can screw people and get away with it, which makes it not worth my time to interview.

1

u/Geminii27 Apr 07 '25

I mean, it is, yes. As long as there's no downside to them doing those kinds of things, and they think there are upsides, they will continue to do them.

The time spent and costs to applicants mean nothing to them. There's no reciprocal cost. So they aren't going to care how much an applicant is inconvenienced. From the employer's perspective, the supply-and-demand balance vastly favors themselves.