• He spent more time writing the prompt than he would with just writing an email. I think you dodged a bullet by not getting hired there

    • I find it amusing that they tried to automate it with variables, etc, but seemingly wanted to make LLM generate a new response every time. Standard once written or even generated rejection form could’ve been more economically sound. But, but - then you wouldn’t up the metrics of AI usage in your department!

  • Wouldn’t it have been easier to just get AI to wrote the message and then just use that same canned response going forward instead of using AI to generate it each time? What a waste of resources

    • If it’s a canned response, why not just do it yourself? It’d take like 5 minutes. Oh, those skills are rotting because AI? Yeah.

      • Also people don’t know how to be social anymore so they find it easier to tell a robot to write a warm rejection email rather than writing one themselves.

    • I see this a lot. I got brought into a project where the entire CI/CD was a prompt.

  • Reply: You really missed out not offering me a job, as I would have never made such a big mistake. But seeing how unprofessional your company is, I am no longer interested.

  • As a cost-cutting measure, rejected applicants will be given a prompt and expected to generate their own rejection message. {{Announcement_closing}}.

  • Why not just say “we are sorry but we will not be moving forward with your application at this time” like a normal person?

    Unless…

    • Why not ghost the candidate which seems to be the most normal response these days for some reason

  • Yeah, the state of things is ugly.

    HR departments get flooded with AI generated applications by the truckload, making automating rejections the only viable way to keep up - at least there was a conscious decision here to reply to an applicant, many just ghost them which is just bad form.

    • HR departments get flooded with AI generated applications by the truckload making automating rejections the only viable way to keep up

      That goes both ways. Employers have been auto rejecting applicants for years, so applicants have shifted to automating applications.

      Why should someone looking for a job take the time to craft an application, when it gets rejected without a person ever actually looking at it.


      Last time I went job hunting (2yrs ago), I got a response from less than 1% of the jobs I applied to.

      • It sure does. I for my part always used the official EU tool for creating my CV and applications, which made applying somewhere a pretty fast act - if i looked for the next job, i just uploaded the file with my old CV there and could just add what was new. It’s pretty useful even today i think! https://europass.europa.eu/en/create-europass-cv

        My experience was not as abysmal as yours, but it also is much farther in the past - last time i was job hunting was around 2016. That 1% response rate is awful… only way to mentally survive that is by not expecting to hear anything back.

    • 15 days

      You’re making it sound like it was the applicant foult while the recruting proces was broken years before AI became common.

      Also in the recruitment process HR is the professional while a applicant is amateur. The burden should be primarily on them.

    • That’s complete nonsense. While people were (mostly) writing applications by hand for each, companies have been automating this process for over 10 years at this point, way before LLMs were even a thing.

  • 14 days

    Remember to use candidate name and company name variables.

    Well it looks like this reminder worked 😆