17 daysAm I wrong or does the article feel like it was written by AI?
- Deestan@lemmy.worldEnglish17 days
It is pure slop.
Random assortment of keyword-related sentences, tied together with superficially correct language.
No human would write that thank you notes are “contentious” and “require the applicant to do free work”, while linking to an X post of some dude saying “pro tip: write thank you notes”
- reksas@sopuli.xyzEnglish15 days
Companies: Do use ai for everything always or you will be fired
Someone: makes job application using ai
company: not like that
- cøre@leminal.spaceEnglish15 days
I’ve interviewed people and gotten thank you emails from them, and they’ve never factored into a hiring decision.
- aesthelete@lemmy.worldEnglish15 days
I’ve never gotten a job for which I sent a thank you letter. Maybe I’m overthinking it, but I think it may come across as desperate.
- saltesc@lemmy.worldEnglish17 days
I deal with job applications. It’s incredibly obvious when a CV and cover letter is just AI. There’s no need to even confirm it with software. Everyone bins them straight away.
It’s not so much a surge in using AI on genuine job applications—and honestly, that wouldn’t even be an issue—its the sheer amount of slop spam coming in. They’ll apply for half a dozen jobs with different resumes catered for them, from anything from entry level data analyst to director of marketing, not realising it’s the same company.
- 17 days
I refuse to write any sort of cover letter for any job application. It’s a job. I want it for the money. I’m not going to wrote some bullshit about how I’ve always dreamed of working for said company and it’s the perfect role for me. In an ideal world I wouldn’t be working at all.
Same here. They can find out what I’m like in a conversation, not an essay.
- Squizzy@lemmy.worldEnglish16 days
Its essentially expanding on the bulletpoints in your CV. Annoying but not the end of the world. I hate sites that want it reinput in specific formats for no good reason
- Echo Dot@feddit.ukEnglish15 days
Especially when the job is just some generic office job that you can get elsewhere. It’s just not worth my time filling those in, I could have applied for 10 jobs in that time that just require me to upload my CV.
- Flatfire@lemmy.caEnglish15 days
Have I gone my whole life doing cover letters “wrong”? I use them as an opportunity to talk about things I’ve worked on as it relates to the responsibilities of the job that a resume wouldn’t necessarily explain in depth. I’ve never treated it like I’m meant to ingratiate myself to anpotential employer for the chance. Usually the resume is “Here’s where I’ve worked and my roles there” and the cover letter is “Here’s what I’ve worked on and how that experience is relevant”
The whole concept of a cover letter seems ridiculous. Never wrote one either.
I hire for our company and a cover letter is definitely helpful in choosing who to interview since a resume doesn’t always give a lot of useful information that helps us.
I don’t care about your intentions for working, of course it’s money or experience or whatever.
But things like hobbies, travel experiences, location and relocation opportunities, etc all have a factor on if I choose to interview them and often a lot of that doesn’t get included in resumes.
That you are clearly not doing it for the money. If money was your incentive, you could invest half an hour in a cover letter, that doubles as basic research for a possible interview.
Sure, selling stuff at the super market does not need an cl, but many other position expect you to do ‘basic’ research.
- lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.worldEnglish16 days
Just use a generator, they’re cheap and easy and tailored to your resume. DM me for recs, happy to send some ideas or freebie codes
- Echo Dot@feddit.ukEnglish15 days
That’s a wild thing to say in a thread about how AI slot isn’t appreciated.
- lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.worldEnglish15 days
Fair, but the people getting the jobs are going to be the ones who use the advantages. The way of the world now
- Echo Dot@feddit.ukEnglish15 days
Will literally talking about how recruiters don’t like AI written cover letters.
- MagicShel@lemmy.zipEnglish16 days
I saw a job app the other day. Caught my eye because it’s offering 1.5-2x what I’m making today. They have a big disclaimer that they use AI to help vet resumes. I’m not applying because I’m happy where I am (and because an undisclosed portion of that pay is performance based), but if I did, I guarantee I’m sending AI slop that knows how to sound like what AI wants to hear.
I have been on both sides of hiring. It’s awful for everyone. It’s like speed dating because you need a partner in two weeks. AI is bullshit. HR is bullshit. Leetcode is bullshit. To a point, even a degree is bullshit — almost all of my coworkers have at least a bachelor’s degree but I’ll bet none of them know I do not — one of the guys who works for me just got his Master’s. The only good test is to sit down with someone and see if they have what you’re looking for.
Every time I’ve gotten to do that, I’ve been hired. But I’ve gone months unemployed because getting that shot can be so difficult — the one place my lack of degree holds me back.
Anyway it’s like Star Wars said — when bullshit rises, more bullshit rises to meet it.
- 17 days
What if the preliminary reviewer is an AI and it really likes AI written text?
- lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.worldEnglish16 days
Cover letter generators are really good now. You’re noticing the low-effort ones, but the adept users are tweaking and editing before send. If it hasn’t happened already, pretty soon you will not be able to tell the difference.
- anothermember@feddit.ukEnglish17 days
Something is wrong here, LLMs won’t spit out the same word-for-word response for the same prompt that’s not how they work.
- ViatorOmnium@piefed.socialEnglish17 days
It’s probably not the same word for word, but with very similar structures. And LLMs tend to structure the text in very similar ways that don’t feel quite right.
- hperrin@lemmy.caEnglish17 days
You are right, but you are also wrong. If they’re given the same seed, they certainly will. They are 100% deterministic. But in reality, the seed is randomly generated, so yeah, it won’t be exactly the same every time.
- anothermember@feddit.ukEnglish17 days
Where was I wrong? I said nothing that contradicts the detail you added.
- hperrin@lemmy.caEnglish17 days
LLMs won’t spit out the same word-for-word response for the same prompt
You can give an LLM the same seed and it will spit out the same word-for-word response. That’s how they work. It’s just a bunch of math.
- anothermember@feddit.ukEnglish16 days
You can give an LLM the same seed and it will spit out the same word-for-word response. That’s how they work. It’s just a bunch of math.
You’re assuming that because I missed out that detail I must be ignorant of it, that’s not very charitable, I could well have been ignorant of it but you could have made your otherwise useful clarification without telling me I was wrong.
- hperrin@lemmy.caEnglish16 days
You said “that’s not how they work”. But that is how they work. Same prompt = same output. Throw some random data in there to jumble things around and you get a little variance. That’s the seed, and we only need to do that because LLMs are inherently deterministic.
Same reason Minecraft has a random seed for world generation, and block cipher algorithms use an initialization vector and/or feedback loop. We don’t want the same thing every time.
I did say that you’re right, because the tooling we use around the LLM itself does exactly what you’re talking about. So, in practice, you’re right.
- 𝙈𝙞𝙖@quokk.auEnglish16 days
Even if they had the same seed, they would all need the exact same prompt. The chances of multiple people all independently coming up with the exact same prompt is highly unlikely.
- hperrin@lemmy.caEnglish16 days
Please read the last sentence of my comment. I am not saying that the interpretation is wrong, I’m saying the statement that that’s not how LLMs work is wrong. That is how LLMs work. They are deterministic. The only reason they don’t do that in practice is because we purposefully seed them with random data to make them not do that.
