Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

People who use AI to write CVs and cover letters

We're turning out generations of people who can't count or write. And putting them into jobs where they should be able to count and write.
I didn't think it was so difficult to grasp 🤷‍♂️

We’ve been doing that for several decades now.
Hence blaming LLMs for it seeming odd to me.

I’ve no idea how they are likely to worsen your shopping experience in power outages.
 
Last edited:
We’ve been doing that for several decades now.
Hence blaming LLMs for it seeming odd to me.
The use of LLMs means even more people will end up in roles they're not fit for.
If only there was a way to separate the wheat from the chaff, something handwritten by the applicant. (handwritten meaning not written by AI)
 
The use of LLMs means even more people will end up in roles they're not fit for.
If only there was a way to separate the wheat from the chaff, something handwritten by the applicant. (handwritten meaning not written by AI)

Because CVs and interviews and the whole HR merry go round works so well at finding non-bullshitters?

The first time I heard this whine about someone struggling to count change it was apparently decimalisation that was at fault.

I always thought some kind of in-person testing of basic aptitudes and skills was useful, but HR people have always poo-poo’d that sort of thing when I suggested it.

Maybe all the cheating tools will change that a bit.
 
Last edited:
Because CVs and interviews and the whole HR merry go round works so well at finding non-bullshitters?
Do you think bullshitters should be rewarded by allowing them to use tools that elevate their apparent worthiness for a position?
The first time I heard this whine about someone struggling to count change it was apparently decimalisation that was at fault.
Being in the wrong job was at fault this time.
 
Do you think bullshitters should be rewarded by allowing them to use tools that elevate their apparent worthiness for a position?

Bullshitters have been rewarded for as long as I can remember. The tools may change but the game doesn’t.
 
We had a massive storm here last year, and most of the country had no electricity for quite a while, which meant most shops were closed, but some stayed open with a "Cash Only" sign on the door. Have you ever had to wait at the checkout for 5 minutes while someone tries to work out how much change you're owed? I have, and, surprisingly, I didn't even find it funny. I found it sad and embarrassing.

If LLMs are the future, the world is fucked.

I find this story hard to believe. Did nobody have a pocket calculator? The vast majority of phones - even dumb phones - come with a calculator function. Pocket calculators can even be completely solar-powered, so they can be stashed for ages under the counter without needing to worry about the battery going bad.
 
I find this story hard to believe. Did nobody have a pocket calculator? The vast majority of phones - even dumb phones - come with a calculator function. Pocket calculators can even be completely solar-powered, so they can be stashed for ages under the counter without needing to worry about the battery going bad.
How were they charging their phones?
 
I find this story hard to believe. Did nobody have a pocket calculator? The vast majority of phones - even dumb phones - come with a calculator function. Pocket calculators can even be completely solar-powered, so they can be stashed for ages under the counter without needing to worry about the battery going bad.
I also found it hard to believe, but it's the truth 🤷‍♂️
 
I always thought some kind of in-person testing of basic aptitudes and skills was useful, but HR people have always poo-poo’d that sort of thing when I suggested it.

Maybe all the cheating tools will change that a bit.
In my industry (tech), technical tests are absolutely normal. The problem these days is that they tend not to be done in person but more 'do this at home and then submit it in the next week'. If they pass muster, they're then invited to a proper interview. While it becomes clear pretty fast if they don't understand stuff because they used AI on the initial test, it's a waste of everyone's time for them to get to interview stage. (Being more discriminating about who even gets the test would help but sometimes people with a load of experience are surprisingly bad.)
 
We had a massive storm here last year, and most of the country had no electricity for quite a while, which meant most shops were closed, but some stayed open with a "Cash Only" sign on the door. Have you ever had to wait at the checkout for 5 minutes while someone tries to work out how much change you're owed? I have, and, surprisingly, I didn't even find it funny. I found it sad and embarrassing.

If LLMs are the future, the world is fucked.


I’m sure people said that about planting grains, the wheel, the seed drill, penicillin….
 
We're turning out generations of people who can't count or write. And putting them into jobs where they should be able to count and write.
I didn't think it was so difficult to grasp 🤷‍♂️

How many people can spin wool into yarn? Light a fire with flint and steel or milk a cow? All of those were once vital skills…
 
How were they charging their phones?
How long was the power outage? My phone lasts at least a good few hours even with heavy use. That's before putting into power saver mode, which can stretch it out to days, especially if I'm only using it sparingly.

In the context of running a business, having some solar-powered calculators on hand ought to be specified in the business continuity plan, if the intention of the business is to continue operations during a power outage.
 
How long was the power outage? My phone lasts at least a good few hours even with heavy use. That's before putting into power saver mode, which can stretch it out to days, especially if I'm only using it sparingly.

In the context of running a business, having some solar-powered calculators on hand ought to be specified in the business continuity plan, if the intention of the business is to continue operations during a power outage.
The electricity was out for three weeks in some places. Mine was out for 15 days.
Most people aren't prepared for such eventualities.
 
The electricity was out for three weeks in some places. Mine was out for 15 days.
Most people aren't prepared for such eventualities.

Individuals might not, but businesses should be. Having cashiers able to double-check their figures in such circumstances is good business practice. Plus they would be able to better help customers if necessary.
 
In my industry (tech), technical tests are absolutely normal. The problem these days is that they tend not to be done in person but more 'do this at home and then submit it in the next week'. If they pass muster, they're then invited to a proper interview. While it becomes clear pretty fast if they don't understand stuff because they used AI on the initial test, it's a waste of everyone's time for them to get to interview stage. (Being more discriminating about who even gets the test would help but sometimes people with a load of experience are surprisingly bad.)

Yeah, it’s no good giving people a task they can cheat at from home.
 
I haven't used AI to write my CV or cover letter.

However, one of the things that "bothers" me (for lack of a better phrasing) is when any type of careers website has the AI "assistant" who is "ready to help" with any questions or concerns. As you're on a company site, looking at their career page for open positions, a chat messenger thing pops up on the side and there's this bot that's ready to chat with you about the company (or job). It can be a very useful product, if done correctly, but in the experiences I've had with them, the bot is being used as a gatekeeper for the application process. Meaning, there's no "apply now" link to the position you're looking at. You have to "chat" with the bot and give them information such as your name, mobile number (for text purposes) and email address. They in turn say they'll pass it on to a recruiter, who will then contact you for more information (and possibly let you apply once they get what they want). Other chat instances have continued on, asking (somewhat) relevant questions - age ("are you over 18"), allowed to work in the country / need sponsorship, legal stuff that is usually at the tail end of the application process before you hit "submit". I find it frustrating, because I want to enter my information on the website and get on with my day. I don't want to worry about a recruiter trying to text me for a follow up, only to send me a link to finish what I started. I'm there to hand over my basic information, CV and fill out any Q&A in hopes that I get a call back from a hiring manager for a follow up (interview). Instead, you have to jump through a handful of hoops in order to just give them your information.

As it is, text messages from companies are a bit intrusive. I didn't opt in for you to contact me that way; I prefer email because sometimes I can't be answering my phone immediately like that. The way some of the messages are worded, it seems like spam / phishing, so I've inadvertently blocked legit numbers based on how the message reads (there's no formal name -mine or theirs, phone number or anything else saying who they are sometimes). This is when AI butchering stuff could come into play. When it looks like a scam and it isn't.

I'm not thrilled about the possibility of using AI to fix my CV in the future. I know it needs work and it's hard to format it to the different employers I send the information to, because there are great gaps in my employment if I leave things off. If someone were to contact me regarding my application, they're going to wonder why my CV reads like I haven't worked in ten years (if I apply for retail, for example). I'd have to explain I've been working, but just in a different sector. I'd rather leave on my last several years of working history and explain my role in a company, rather than awkwardly telling the caller something different.

I know there are so many "suggestive" "hacks" to outwit the computers that are reading our information (like using white color in the text like previously mentioned) but you have to wonder how valid are they, really? Is whatever software program the document is going in to, really "selecting all" and capturing it? Does it truly know that the secret message you wrote in the footer is what it should do?

One of the employers I worked for, used assessment tests as their main way to see if the person would be a great fit for the company. This is a specific company that states they provide a "cognitive ability assessment used to evaluate an individual's aptitude for problem-solving, learning, and understanding directions". It's a combo exam that feels like you're being put in some special education class rather than a job (I've taken the special education assessments... it was a right pain). The company I applied to and took the test for, hired me. The HR rep said I am one of a very slim handful that had high marks on the program they used. No one had reached the scores I received. She didn't tell me exactly what my numbers were, but she said that they use the program as a way to see "if everyone would get along here" because "there's no drama and we're all basically friendly to each other". Which is bullshit, and I called it on day one. But to each his own. I didn't tell her that I cheated on half of the test as it were. Math isn't my strong point, so I used a calculator. What I didn't understand in some of the other questions, I guessed. I chose answers that made sense for me, even if they were wrong. So if an AI program is being used to see how you react to things, maybe it's not as smart as people think, if I figured I was going to fail the assessment by guessing for at least 50% of it, but was told I ended up with a super high passing grade.

We're all smart, to an extent. It's how you perceive things and figure it all out. My thought process can fluctuate and I ramble. I can write like a low level AI program submitted my work. I can also read something that makes me feel like a human maybe tweaked a few words to make it feel safe. I guess we do what we can to mess with the system.
 
I haven't used AI to write my CV or cover letter.

However, one of the things that "bothers" me (for lack of a better phrasing) is when any type of careers website has the AI "assistant" who is "ready to help" with any questions or concerns. As you're on a company site, looking at their career page for open positions, a chat messenger thing pops up on the side and there's this bot that's ready to chat with you about the company (or job). It can be a very useful product, if done correctly, but in the experiences I've had with them, the bot is being used as a gatekeeper for the application process. Meaning, there's no "apply now" link to the position you're looking at. You have to "chat" with the bot and give them information such as your name, mobile number (for text purposes) and email address. They in turn say they'll pass it on to a recruiter, who will then contact you for more information (and possibly let you apply once they get what they want). Other chat instances have continued on, asking (somewhat) relevant questions - age ("are you over 18"), allowed to work in the country / need sponsorship, legal stuff that is usually at the tail end of the application process before you hit "submit". I find it frustrating, because I want to enter my information on the website and get on with my day. I don't want to worry about a recruiter trying to text me for a follow up, only to send me a link to finish what I started. I'm there to hand over my basic information, CV and fill out any Q&A in hopes that I get a call back from a hiring manager for a follow up (interview). Instead, you have to jump through a handful of hoops in order to just give them your information.

As it is, text messages from companies are a bit intrusive. I didn't opt in for you to contact me that way; I prefer email because sometimes I can't be answering my phone immediately like that. The way some of the messages are worded, it seems like spam / phishing, so I've inadvertently blocked legit numbers based on how the message reads (there's no formal name -mine or theirs, phone number or anything else saying who they are sometimes). This is when AI butchering stuff could come into play. When it looks like a scam and it isn't.

I'm not thrilled about the possibility of using AI to fix my CV in the future. I know it needs work and it's hard to format it to the different employers I send the information to, because there are great gaps in my employment if I leave things off. If someone were to contact me regarding my application, they're going to wonder why my CV reads like I haven't worked in ten years (if I apply for retail, for example). I'd have to explain I've been working, but just in a different sector. I'd rather leave on my last several years of working history and explain my role in a company, rather than awkwardly telling the caller something different.

I know there are so many "suggestive" "hacks" to outwit the computers that are reading our information (like using white color in the text like previously mentioned) but you have to wonder how valid are they, really? Is whatever software program the document is going in to, really "selecting all" and capturing it? Does it truly know that the secret message you wrote in the footer is what it should do?

One of the employers I worked for, used assessment tests as their main way to see if the person would be a great fit for the company. This is a specific company that states they provide a "cognitive ability assessment used to evaluate an individual's aptitude for problem-solving, learning, and understanding directions". It's a combo exam that feels like you're being put in some special education class rather than a job (I've taken the special education assessments... it was a right pain). The company I applied to and took the test for, hired me. The HR rep said I am one of a very slim handful that had high marks on the program they used. No one had reached the scores I received. She didn't tell me exactly what my numbers were, but she said that they use the program as a way to see "if everyone would get along here" because "there's no drama and we're all basically friendly to each other". Which is bullshit, and I called it on day one. But to each his own. I didn't tell her that I cheated on half of the test as it were. Math isn't my strong point, so I used a calculator. What I didn't understand in some of the other questions, I guessed. I chose answers that made sense for me, even if they were wrong. So if an AI program is being used to see how you react to things, maybe it's not as smart as people think, if I figured I was going to fail the assessment by guessing for at least 50% of it, but was told I ended up with a super high passing grade.

We're all smart, to an extent. It's how you perceive things and figure it all out. My thought process can fluctuate and I ramble. I can write like a low level AI program submitted my work. I can also read something that makes me feel like a human maybe tweaked a few words to make it feel safe. I guess we do what we can to mess with the system.

Those AI assistants before you even apply aren’t just a pain in the arse. They have been copied by all manner of scammers who post up fake jobs and just want to harness peoples’ personal information.
 
Those AI assistants before you even apply aren’t just a pain in the arse. They have been copied by all manner of scammers who post up fake jobs and just want to harness peoples’ personal information.
I totally agree.

Although, conversely speaking, I've walked in to various companies to inquire about work, and the hiring staff has specifically stated "do not use Indeed, Ziprecruiter and the like [to apply here], as those sites are filled with scammers. Only apply through our website". There have been times I've used the 'recruitment' sites, only to inquire by some sort of message (email, phone call) and the company didn't know what I was talking about.

I've also noticed that there are some websites that look so scammy and so weird, that you question if it's totally real.
For example, there's a physical therapy place across the road from me. They are in a tiny plaza with other doctors offices. This therapy office has a website that looks straight out of the late 1990s and early 2000s pop up advertisement genre (if anyone recalls the scam pop ups that would load your screen with crazy stuff. Don't know how else to explain it). This site is loaded with flashy fonts, altered star reviews - which don't tell you where the review came from (it uses the colored stars from Google Reviews, Trip Advisor, Yelp and other sites), pictures that are stretched out and distorted, and the owner is selling his book on the main page plus every other sub page you click on. He's trying to generate clicks for a different way to sell his business and not an actual book explaining how to fix your [back, neck, etc] issue with simple exercises. It's a major sales pitch to visit him. There are 'free downloads' of PDF stuff, but they are 65-90 pages of fluff; nothing substantial. It's a couple paragraphs of "how to" and the rest is "come see me for more".

Even the links to Amazon, where he's attempting to sell his larger paged books, the reviews state the same - he's generating 120 pages of a sales pitch for his office. Nothing states how you can follow simple steps in helping yourself. For $20, people are wishing they could get a refund and un-see what they read.

Anyway, the site looks fake, including the fact their main office location is in bold font with (222)222-2222 as their phone number on the top of the page. It's not until you get to the bottom (it's actually in the footer), where it has their address and real phone number. When you click on "locations" tab, there are 3 other offices, all of which have similar information. Each office number changes by one digit - (333)333-3333 all the way to 555.

I had gone in and questioned it one day, as to inquire also about employment due to their 'careers' tab saying they were hiring. The office manager said she knows there's an issue with the site. "IT is supposed to have fixed it. There is a constant help desk ticket for this issue". So they want to blame someone in an off site (third party) office, instead of finding someone to work for them internally? Which also means if they are aware but unaware, AI could do so much more for them (help or no help. I'd actually like to see the site cleaned up a bit. Streamline it better).

As I write this, I went to the site. They fixed it for now, so the browser version does not have the 222 - 555 numbers. It still looks like a pop up scam site though, and they're still listing the link to the book as well. The same job openings from the beginning of the year are there too. Which tells me the office manager isn't leaving so quickly, as I was led to believe when I talked to the co-owner.

Also, this same company, if you sign up for their emails, you get blasted with daily messages, upwards of 3 times a day. All it is, is a generated message regurgitated in so many words, on how this guy fixed his body problems (sports injuries, etc) with the right exercise and mindset. He wants to be able to do the same for the world, and wants people to come in to his office so he can fix you. They're all themed messages but also the same message, slightly altered. I don't think he or any one else is writing this. Maybe he gives some AI program key words and that programs creates the email blast because the marketing team sucks if it's an actual human.

So tech can help but not help in the job search?
 
I totally agree.

Although, conversely speaking, I've walked in to various companies to inquire about work, and the hiring staff has specifically stated "do not use Indeed, Ziprecruiter and the like [to apply here], as those sites are filled with scammers. Only apply through our website". There have been times I've used the 'recruitment' sites, only to inquire by some sort of message (email, phone call) and the company didn't know what I was talking about.

I've also noticed that there are some websites that look so scammy and so weird, that you question if it's totally real.
For example, there's a physical therapy place across the road from me. They are in a tiny plaza with other doctors offices. This therapy office has a website that looks straight out of the late 1990s and early 2000s pop up advertisement genre (if anyone recalls the scam pop ups that would load your screen with crazy stuff. Don't know how else to explain it). This site is loaded with flashy fonts, altered star reviews - which don't tell you where the review came from (it uses the colored stars from Google Reviews, Trip Advisor, Yelp and other sites), pictures that are stretched out and distorted, and the owner is selling his book on the main page plus every other sub page you click on. He's trying to generate clicks for a different way to sell his business and not an actual book explaining how to fix your [back, neck, etc] issue with simple exercises. It's a major sales pitch to visit him. There are 'free downloads' of PDF stuff, but they are 65-90 pages of fluff; nothing substantial. It's a couple paragraphs of "how to" and the rest is "come see me for more".

Even the links to Amazon, where he's attempting to sell his larger paged books, the reviews state the same - he's generating 120 pages of a sales pitch for his office. Nothing states how you can follow simple steps in helping yourself. For $20, people are wishing they could get a refund and un-see what they read.

Anyway, the site looks fake, including the fact their main office location is in bold font with (222)222-2222 as their phone number on the top of the page. It's not until you get to the bottom (it's actually in the footer), where it has their address and real phone number. When you click on "locations" tab, there are 3 other offices, all of which have similar information. Each office number changes by one digit - (333)333-3333 all the way to 555.

I had gone in and questioned it one day, as to inquire also about employment due to their 'careers' tab saying they were hiring. The office manager said she knows there's an issue with the site. "IT is supposed to have fixed it. There is a constant help desk ticket for this issue". So they want to blame someone in an off site (third party) office, instead of finding someone to work for them internally? Which also means if they are aware but unaware, AI could do so much more for them (help or no help. I'd actually like to see the site cleaned up a bit. Streamline it better).

As I write this, I went to the site. They fixed it for now, so the browser version does not have the 222 - 555 numbers. It still looks like a pop up scam site though, and they're still listing the link to the book as well. The same job openings from the beginning of the year are there too. Which tells me the office manager isn't leaving so quickly, as I was led to believe when I talked to the co-owner.

Also, this same company, if you sign up for their emails, you get blasted with daily messages, upwards of 3 times a day. All it is, is a generated message regurgitated in so many words, on how this guy fixed his body problems (sports injuries, etc) with the right exercise and mindset. He wants to be able to do the same for the world, and wants people to come in to his office so he can fix you. They're all themed messages but also the same message, slightly altered. I don't think he or any one else is writing this. Maybe he gives some AI program key words and that programs creates the email blast because the marketing team sucks if it's an actual human.

So tech can help but not help in the job search?

AI meets 90’s web design. :eek:

Needs nuking from orbit.
 
I wouldn't take the risk of sending an AI CV or covering letter for a job application.

In any case the way I create them has a logic to it which I wouldn't trust to an AI.
 
Employers think they're good and spotting AI writing and they are not. A guy I know applied for a bunch of jobs where employer clearly stated that they would not consider AI-written applications. His AI-written applications did really well and got him interviews (presumably at the expense of non-AI applications). Another friend - a very proficient academic writer - had her work, written without AI, flagged as AI writing. She can't prove it is not AI because computer (AI filter) says no.

It's a bad situation and at this point it doesn't matter how people approach it. Fucked if you do and fucked if you don't. I used to pride myself on my personal statements so I'm a little sore about this, but when faced with another 8,000 essay where I have to hit a bunch of bullshit keywords, I am wondering if I'm wasting my time.
 
Employers think they're good and spotting AI writing and they are not. A guy I know applied for a bunch of jobs where employer clearly stated that they would not consider AI-written applications. His AI-written applications did really well and got him interviews (presumably at the expense of non-AI applications). Another friend - a very proficient academic writer - had her work, written without AI, flagged as AI writing. She can't prove it is not AI because computer (AI filter) says no.

It's a bad situation and at this point it doesn't matter how people approach it. Fucked if you do and fucked if you don't. I used to pride myself on my personal statements so I'm a little sore about this, but when faced with another 8,000 essay where I have to hit a bunch of bullshit keywords, I am wondering if I'm wasting my time.
I image the trick is to edit the AI text to make it more human not just submit whatever it throws out.
 
If someone uses AI to write a competent, well written letter, especially if they have English as a second language I would not have any issues at all.
 
Back
Top Bottom