I honestly see your point. It’s just capitalism doing what capitalism does. The bars are set so incredibly high, for every groveling “winner” there are tens of thousands "losers” who will become hungry, homeless, and die in the streets or in forced labor camps. The question is, how well do you like the taste and feel of that steak in your mouth, and how long will you get to enjoy it?
I’m not saying there’s a right or wrong answer. I’m saying it’s wrong to be forced into a position to have to make that decision, though.
If we’re at “tens of thousands of applicants per job” and “forced labor camps” we’re well beyond any remotely relevant scenario to what this article is about. Sure, hyperbole is a routine part of Internet arguments, but this feels like “I’m not fond of coffee” “Oh, so you want to kill everyone who has a caffeine addiction?” Sort of overreaction.
All I’m saying is that AI will likely be used as part of the hiring process in the future and people who absolutely refuse to engage with it will be taking themselves out of a significant portion of the job market.
It’s not hyporbole. I applied once for a job in a small tourist trap town before AI was used in screening. I went to the office to check on it, not having heard back within seven business days. The receptionist was flipping through resumés, and when I inquired, motioned to several mail crates full of resumés. She apologized and said she stopped counting at 700. That’s a small town.
If prisons aren’t forced labor camps, what are they?
Firstly, 700 is nowhere near “tens of thousands.” Secondly, did those 700 applicants die in the streets or in prison? Or did they just go apply for some other job? People generally apply for a lot more jobs than they end up getting. And how is AI screening going to change the outcome? Would those 700 applicants get jobs there if they hadn’t been using AI?
Also, note that America is not the whole world. Most civilized western nations have outlawed slavery, so their prisons aren’t forced labor camps. And the jobless are not automatically imprisoned.
Really, this whole thread is just weird. I pointed out that voluntarily avoiding applying for jobs just means other people will take them, and we leapt instantly to some kind of cartoonish dystopia full of slavery and death.
700 is one job in a small town, mostly seasonal work. She stopped counting at 700. How many jobs do you think there are, there, especially in off -season? I’m sure several did end up homeless or dead in prison. I’m not about to doxx myself so believe what you choose.
I’m well aware USA isn’t all the world. Several other Western societies and prisons seem to follow US lead. And no one said jobless automatically end up in prison. It’s usually a series of unfortunate happenings. Lose a job, can’t get another with livable wages, end up homeless, hungry, steal a can of sardines or crackers, get arrested, can’t make bail, fight to survive in jail awaiting time or have an untreated medical issue…
What’s really weird is you condescendingly telling me that my experience isn’t all the world’s, while failing to realize yours isn’t, either.
Yes, and? The American unemployment rate is currently 4.2%. You’re imagining a scenario that’s simply not backed up by real evidence, just a single anecdote with wild extrapolation. Okay, there were a lot of applicants for that one particular job. Must have been a really nice one. Most of the applicants didn’t get in.
How would AI screening change this?
Did those failed applicants just give up and never apply for another job again afterward? You’re apparently one of them, are you now unemployed forever?
I honestly see your point. It’s just capitalism doing what capitalism does. The bars are set so incredibly high, for every groveling “winner” there are tens of thousands "losers” who will become hungry, homeless, and die in the streets or in forced labor camps. The question is, how well do you like the taste and feel of that steak in your mouth, and how long will you get to enjoy it?
I’m not saying there’s a right or wrong answer. I’m saying it’s wrong to be forced into a position to have to make that decision, though.
If we’re at “tens of thousands of applicants per job” and “forced labor camps” we’re well beyond any remotely relevant scenario to what this article is about. Sure, hyperbole is a routine part of Internet arguments, but this feels like “I’m not fond of coffee” “Oh, so you want to kill everyone who has a caffeine addiction?” Sort of overreaction.
All I’m saying is that AI will likely be used as part of the hiring process in the future and people who absolutely refuse to engage with it will be taking themselves out of a significant portion of the job market.
It’s not hyporbole. I applied once for a job in a small tourist trap town before AI was used in screening. I went to the office to check on it, not having heard back within seven business days. The receptionist was flipping through resumés, and when I inquired, motioned to several mail crates full of resumés. She apologized and said she stopped counting at 700. That’s a small town.
If prisons aren’t forced labor camps, what are they?
Firstly, 700 is nowhere near “tens of thousands.” Secondly, did those 700 applicants die in the streets or in prison? Or did they just go apply for some other job? People generally apply for a lot more jobs than they end up getting. And how is AI screening going to change the outcome? Would those 700 applicants get jobs there if they hadn’t been using AI?
Also, note that America is not the whole world. Most civilized western nations have outlawed slavery, so their prisons aren’t forced labor camps. And the jobless are not automatically imprisoned.
Really, this whole thread is just weird. I pointed out that voluntarily avoiding applying for jobs just means other people will take them, and we leapt instantly to some kind of cartoonish dystopia full of slavery and death.
700 is one job in a small town, mostly seasonal work. She stopped counting at 700. How many jobs do you think there are, there, especially in off -season? I’m sure several did end up homeless or dead in prison. I’m not about to doxx myself so believe what you choose.
I’m well aware USA isn’t all the world. Several other Western societies and prisons seem to follow US lead. And no one said jobless automatically end up in prison. It’s usually a series of unfortunate happenings. Lose a job, can’t get another with livable wages, end up homeless, hungry, steal a can of sardines or crackers, get arrested, can’t make bail, fight to survive in jail awaiting time or have an untreated medical issue…
What’s really weird is you condescendingly telling me that my experience isn’t all the world’s, while failing to realize yours isn’t, either.
Yes, and? The American unemployment rate is currently 4.2%. You’re imagining a scenario that’s simply not backed up by real evidence, just a single anecdote with wild extrapolation. Okay, there were a lot of applicants for that one particular job. Must have been a really nice one. Most of the applicants didn’t get in.