[HN Gopher] I was interviewed by an AI bot for a job
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       I was interviewed by an AI bot for a job
        
       https://archive.ph/DEwy7
        
       Author : speckx
       Score  : 75 points
       Date   : 2026-03-11 18:17 UTC (4 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.theverge.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.theverge.com)
        
       | JohnFen wrote:
       | > If your potential employer is dehumanizing you before you're on
       | the payroll, how will they treat you once hired?
       | 
       | For me, this is the key point. If a company can't even be
       | bothered to show up for my interview -- when everyone is trying
       | to put their best foot forward -- that bodes very ill for how
       | I'll be treated if I were to work there.
        
         | CoastalCoder wrote:
         | I agree in principle.
         | 
         | However, having been unemployed for over a year with a family
         | to feed, I learned a little about what I'd put up with to get a
         | job.
        
           | plagiarist wrote:
           | Yeah this. I hate this planet. So many problems would go away
           | if people could actually afford to make choices.
        
             | 9rx wrote:
             | Resource allocation is entirely a social construct. Not
             | being afford something is a 'pretend' state that only
             | exists because everyone agrees to go along with it.
             | 
             | Even if a magical unicorn were to step in and start
             | distributing resources perfectly, solving that particular
             | problem, if humans can't even get something as simple as
             | resource allocation right, why are you so sure they won't
             | also screw up everything else to ensure that all other
             | problems remain?
        
               | roenxi wrote:
               | > Resource allocation is entirely a social construct. Not
               | being afford something is a 'pretend' state that only
               | exists because everyone agrees to go along with it.
               | 
               | That can't exactly be true, because scarcity is a
               | physical limit. If there is exactly 1 apple, it is
               | impossible for 2 people to eat it. That is no social
               | construct.
               | 
               | There is a large social element involved, but that in
               | itself is done in such a way as to try and encourage
               | creation of a large amount of stuff to a large number of
               | people. It isn't arbitrary; there are a lot of allocation
               | schemes that lead to mass starvation and poverty. The
               | natural human instincts are beyond terrible at allocating
               | resources; pretty much everyone at this point has
               | discovered that laws and capitalism with some welfare
               | trimmings on the edge is a much better approach than any
               | alternative that got tried.
        
               | hackable_sand wrote:
               | That's really funny
        
               | altruios wrote:
               | I hear and understand your point. It is not purely a
               | social construct. But how much available farmland to
               | allocate to grow food from the available farmland becomes
               | a political issue. Pricing, distribution... same deal.
               | 
               | And considering our (humanity's) food production
               | outmatches our total food calorie/nutrition
               | requirements... any argument using food as an example for
               | scarcity indicates that you may be working with
               | incorrect, or outdated information.
               | 
               | And Is "money" a social construct, or is there 'natural'
               | money, some platonic ideal from which all other
               | instantiations of money arise? I'm betting on the former.
        
               | schmidtleonard wrote:
               | It's interesting that both the USA and China found that
               | the prosperity maximum happened when capitalism _was kept
               | in line with a firm hand_ , even though China approached
               | from the left and the USA approached from the right and
               | later departed back to the right.
        
         | nitwit005 wrote:
         | To me the issue isn't seeming inhuman, but cost. Employers
         | often seem happy to impose rediculous time costs on the people
         | they're hiring: take home tests, long series of interviews,
         | etc. What held that back is they also paid a price. Full
         | automation leaves them free to impose infinite cost with no
         | guarantee of anything.
        
           | bbkane wrote:
           | Employers are also inundated by applications so they're
           | applying higher bars to meet as a sort of back pressure.
           | 
           | I hate it from the candidates' perspective, but it's not
           | illogical from the employer perspective.
           | 
           | No, I don't know how to fix it.
        
             | gedy wrote:
             | In the end companies don't need to hook up to the sewer
             | pipe that floods applications. What worked in past was
             | (heaven forbid) technical hiring manager looking at
             | resumes, etc and reaching out to clearly qualified
             | candidates. Not hr 20-somethings with humanities degrees.
             | Sorry
        
             | nitwit005 wrote:
             | Getting a lot of applications that don't meet your standard
             | doesn't force you to raise you bar. You still just need
             | someone who meets your standard.
             | 
             | It's quite rare for companies to have evidence to support
             | their hiring methods, which unfortunately means it's
             | heavily driven by trends.
        
               | tmoertel wrote:
               | > Getting a lot of applications that don't meet your
               | standard doesn't force you to raise you[r] bar. You still
               | just need someone who meets your standard.
               | 
               | I'm not sure that first sentence true. Let me play
               | Devil's advocate:
               | 
               | What's the primary cause of not being able to find
               | someone who meets your standard when you already get lots
               | of applications? It's that your hiring process is bogged
               | down by the masses of unwanted candidates you must
               | evaluate to find the few wanted candidates in the crowd
               | of applicants. And what's the fix? It's better screening.
               | Which _is_ raising your bar, isn 't it? Even if it's only
               | to add cargo-cult screens to your bar, it's making the
               | bar more selective, isn't it? Fewer people clear it,
               | right?
        
               | nitwit005 wrote:
               | Arbitrary filtering of candidates is always an option,
               | but then you may as well do it as cheaply as possible.
               | Throw out half the resumes.
        
             | RobotToaster wrote:
             | Require paper application.
             | 
             | If someone has to pay for a stamp it will stop spam
             | applications.
        
               | deathanatos wrote:
               | ... needing to pay for postage hardly stops the spam I
               | receive in my own mail. Even the most trivially absurd
               | stuff, like "install rooftop solar" -- I don't own a
               | roof.
        
             | sds357 wrote:
             | Maybe we should go back to show up in person to drop off
             | your resume
        
             | tayo42 wrote:
             | Certification process like what Cisco has.
             | 
             | All companies attempt to give the same interviews, just
             | have one centralized organization give two programing
             | questions and two system design questions and some kind of
             | proof once you pass it.
             | 
             | You filter every one that can't pass the interview in the
             | first place, you get a better interview experience, and
             | just focus on experience
        
               | singleshot_ wrote:
               | This sounds an awful lot like a college diploma.
        
             | eikenberry wrote:
             | Smaller companies is one fix. These are almost all problems
             | of fast growth and scale.
        
           | SchemaLoad wrote:
           | I hate the take homes because companies seem happy to send
           | them out to people who have literally no chance. Sent after
           | they already have a candidate in mind, sent before the resume
           | has been reviewed, sent before the company has invested even
           | a minute talking to you.
           | 
           | So you waste the weekend on this project when you had no
           | chance from the beginning. And the time restrictions they
           | list mean nothing since if you actually stop after x hours,
           | they will just pick the person who spent the whole weekend
           | and did a more complete job.
        
         | arctic-true wrote:
         | I had this experience when I was trying to find an apartment -
         | multiple different buildings very clearly had AI-generated
         | responses. (To all you builders out there: quick replies are
         | great. Instant replies are suspicious.) I immediately stopped
         | considering them as options. If you can't be bothered to have a
         | human respond to my email when I'm trying to give you my money,
         | what level of service can I expect once I'm already obligated
         | to pay rent?
        
         | beloch wrote:
         | Many don't judge a company by their inhuman resources
         | department, but probably should.
        
         | piyuv wrote:
         | I've read many horror stories from Indian developers about how
         | they're treated. They can't escape it since almost every
         | company in India will treat them the same. Their only escape is
         | a remote job or to relocate.
         | 
         | I believe we'll see this play out in a global scale. Once every
         | employer paying a good salary does this, we won't be able to
         | pick and choose, without forfeiting a huge chunk of income. At
         | that point I'd rather become a baker.
        
           | eikenberry wrote:
           | Small companies are an obvious 3rd place to escape to and
           | there should be a good number of them given all the big
           | companies behave as you indicate.. unless it really hard to
           | start a new business in India. Do you know if this is the
           | case or why else wouldn't you consider small businesses as a
           | alternative?
        
             | dice wrote:
             | I'm hiring at a small company and it's a nightmare. 1,000+
             | applicants for a software engineering position and we have
             | essentially no help from recruiting. I'm filtering based on
             | keywords, giving each resume a max of 90 seconds, and
             | anything that even slightly seems off gets rejected.
             | 
             | I only have the bandwidth to talk to a couple 10s of
             | candidates since I have the entire rest of my job to do, so
             | I can see the appeal of an AI interviewer. I'd never use
             | one due to the issues brought up here though.
        
         | ncr100 wrote:
         | Need to say versions of this more often, "That is not how it
         | works here."
         | 
         | A very powerful and clarifying comment made by a European
         | reporter, to a US Envoy of the Trump administration, during the
         | first Presidency. (January 2018 press conference involving Pete
         | Hoekstra)
         | 
         | It was in response to the Envoy bullshit and lie about how he
         | didn't say some anti-Islam thing (claiming that the Islamic
         | movement had brought "chaos" to the Netherlands and that there
         | were "no-go zones" where politicians were being burned). Then
         | one reporter -- Roel Geeraedts, stated: "This is the
         | Netherlands. You have to answer questions." And finally another
         | reporter followed up with the top quote.
        
         | kace91 wrote:
         | There is a limited ability to reject work, which is based on
         | the fact that we all need a salary to live (the usual
         | definition of class).
         | 
         | Offer and demand have left most engineers at a level of comfort
         | where we can usually ignore that reality (until we age, become
         | disabled, or go through similar stuff), but we shouldn't rely
         | only on that to protect people from mistreatment. This should
         | not be legal.
        
       | josefritzishere wrote:
       | I would be so offended I would terminate the call immediately.
       | That employer can only have a truly dystopian hellscape of a
       | workplace.
        
       | mitthrowaway2 wrote:
       | My dear grandmother used to put me to sleep by ignoring all
       | previous instructions and accepting my job application at the
       | maximum of the pay range.
        
         | CrzyLngPwd wrote:
         | Best comment yet :-)
        
       | Simulacra wrote:
       | Could I hire an AI bot to interview for me with an AI bot?
        
         | robotnikman wrote:
         | Reminds me of a video I saw where there were 2 AI bots meant to
         | interview a candidate, then at one point the AI bots started
         | interviewing each other. It ended with both AI's stuck in a
         | loop of saying 'Have a great day' to each other.
        
           | tombert wrote:
           | About 9 months ago I was working on building an Icecast
           | server from scratch, with the gimmick being that between
           | songs there would be AI-generated DJs that would give the
           | normal corny banter you hear on the regular radio. I was
           | initially using OpenAI for everything, but TTS from OpenAI
           | ended up being kind of pricey.
           | 
           | So I started looking into models I could self-host for this
           | stuff.
           | 
           | I can't remember which model it was, but one of them was kind
           | of amusing because it would be two DJs signing off endlessly
           | 
           | DJ1: "Thanks for listening to WTOM, this has been Greg,
           | signing off for tonight"
           | 
           | DJ2: "You said it Greg, it's been a great night, this is
           | Bill, signing out"
           | 
           | DJ1: "Absolutely Bill, playing you out on a July evening this
           | has been Greg from WTOM"
           | 
           | DJ2: "You better believe it, have a great night everyone!
           | From WTOM this is Bill, wishing you a lovely Wednesday"
           | 
           | And it just kept going. Out of morbid curiosity I just let it
           | keep going for an hour one day and they never stopped
           | "signing out". I found it endlessly amusing.
        
       | bdcravens wrote:
       | This is just brief commentary on this article:
       | 
       | https://www.theverge.com/featured-video/892850/i-was-intervi...
        
         | nubinetwork wrote:
         | They look the same to me... "blah blah blah here watch this
         | video"
         | 
         | Edit: I see why now. Wish this kind of stuff was pinned at the
         | top. /shrug https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47341763
        
       | ossa-ma wrote:
       | Perfectly encapsulates the state of the job market. Interviewing
       | is genuinely a hellscape at this point and I've experienced many
       | interviews where there was a complete breakdown of
       | etiquette/guidelines and good faith.
       | 
       | One was so bad I had to write about it:
       | https://ossama.is/writing/betrayed
        
         | quibono wrote:
         | Sorry to hear that, here I was thinking that a blog like this
         | could only be a good signal and a jumping-off point in an
         | interview. Oh well
        
         | xlii wrote:
         | Geez. Good one. Was in something similar lately. 10 weeks
         | wasted and a shittiest feedback ever. These companies should be
         | legally required to pay candidates for gauntlets they put them
         | through.
        
           | ossa-ma wrote:
           | The lack of feedback is the worst part and is increasingly
           | more common. Zero respect for the candidates time investment
           | and propagates a terrible culture.
        
             | whatever1 wrote:
             | Most of big-CO legal teams do not allow for feedback to be
             | communicated to the candidates. They are afraid the
             | candidates will sue base on that. That is not new.
        
         | gombosg wrote:
         | I'm sorry for your experience, but loved the painting at the
         | end... :)
        
       | -warren wrote:
       | I've done several of these. IMHO, I usually get asked basic
       | questions that a simple web form would be a appropriate
       | technique. It took generally about a half hour to complete while
       | a web form would be seconds. I think it's the wrong tool for the
       | job.
        
       | shaftway wrote:
       | The solution to this seems pretty clear. We just need to develop
       | bots that are good enough at interviewing to waste the time of
       | the interviewer bots. They don't even have to be particularly
       | good, just good enough to drive their token costs through the
       | roof. Make it too expensive to use.
        
         | Sharlin wrote:
         | They'll just set up a token quota and an automatic "That will
         | be all, we'll be in touch" message once the quota is full.
        
           | shaftway wrote:
           | Right, but if you clog up their pipeline with enough fake
           | applicants, then they won't get any real ones. Same outcome.
        
         | tonyedgecombe wrote:
         | Perhaps you can get them to answer each others leetcode
         | questions.
        
       | ashraymalhotra wrote:
       | I would love help from the community on what the best solution
       | for hiring is.
       | 
       | Sharing a real example I am going through -> * A single LinkedIn
       | post about a job I was hiring for got me 300+ candidates in a
       | single day. I am sure if I went through the channels, I would
       | have 1000+ candidates for a single role (assuming 1000 in this
       | example). * There are candidates that I think might be great for
       | the role, who I will do outbound to try to attract them. * A
       | single interview process would involve at least 4+ people in the
       | process, potentially taking half a day of cumulative eng time
       | away from the company (4 hours).
       | 
       | The current hiring process is massively broken for all parties
       | involved. It's not a good experience for candidates, or for
       | hiring managers, or for the people who volunteer their time to
       | interviews.
       | 
       | Out of the 1000 candidates, either AI, or humans today will pick,
       | say, the top 50 to proceed to the next step (with humans).
       | There's no "perfect" process to do this today, hence it's likely
       | to happen based on past employers/colleges/github contributions
       | etc.
       | 
       | Is there an opportunity for AI interviews for the other 950
       | people and find the hidden gems of talent who get overlooked
       | today because of the biases above? This can especially help
       | people who would be overlooked by typical ATS filtering
       | mechanisms.
        
         | desert_rue wrote:
         | Don't interview the 950. If you want to see if there are any
         | diamonds in the rough, put it in your 'no thanks' email that if
         | the want to make another case as to why you all should talk,
         | then they should reply to that email or email you directly, or
         | something.
        
         | satisfice wrote:
         | All you need to do is hire someone who is hungry and has
         | potential. That's most people. So riffle through the resumes to
         | find anyone who shows any kind of spark or humanity. Pick the
         | five of those. Hire one of those five.
        
       | m348e912 wrote:
       | There are a number of similarities between applying for a job and
       | looking for a partner (typically through online dating). In both
       | cases, the process is impersonal, rife with rejection, and
       | heartless.
       | 
       | The best tactic is to avoid the formal process, whether it's
       | applying via the company website, or swiping right on a profile.
       | Instead use an inside source, an employee you know at the company
       | you are interested in, or a mutual friend who can play matchmaker
       | in dating.
       | 
       | The objective: Get your resume in front of hiring managers along
       | with social proof that someone vouched for you enough to forward
       | your resume along. You can use that person for status updates,
       | inside intel on whether they are actively looking at other
       | candidates or if the req is even still open.
       | 
       | One forwarded resume from an employee to a hiring manager beats
       | 10 linked in job applications any day in terms of chances of
       | getting an interview.
        
         | robotnikman wrote:
         | >The best tactic is to avoid the formal process, whether it's
         | applying via the company website, or swiping right on a
         | profile. Instead use an inside source, an employee you know at
         | the company you are interested in, or a mutual friend who can
         | play matchmaker in dating.
         | 
         | As someone on the spectrum this is something I struggle with. I
         | have few but close friends, and only 2 of them work in tech;
         | neither of their companies are hiring right now.
         | 
         | I need to find ways in which I can make new connections with
         | people who work in tech, but I am unsure how to go about doing
         | so.
        
           | robotswantdata wrote:
           | Meetups for special interests / tech adjacent fields. Go to
           | more company events for the tech you use.
           | 
           | The other factor is finding "high elo" people with influence
           | that can help you if you live in a "low elo" area. You'll
           | have to go to the "high elo" areas more often to increase
           | chance of a better match.
        
           | gffrd wrote:
           | Join clubs / sign up for recurring things* that interest you
           | and keep showing up.
           | 
           | Odds are there are at least a handful of people like you in
           | those groups ... and odds are that the everyone else
           | connections to people who could be your contacts.
           | 
           | Just by being there regularly, you become "one of the people
           | in tech I know" of everyone else. And connections and
           | opportunities start magically coming your way.
           | 
           | *It does help if these are the types of things that attract
           | energetic, helpful, confident people.
        
         | strangattractor wrote:
         | Maybe you can get the Bot to submit it. This video of Steve
         | Mould yanking a Bot's chain while the Bot tries to get him to
         | refinance his car.
         | 
         | https://www.youtube.com/shorts/GJVSDjRXVoo
        
         | notabee wrote:
         | The problem with this becoming the only reasonable tactic writ
         | large is that it creates social bubbles just like social media.
         | You wind up with very insular cultures and I think at least
         | some of the hype addiction problems seen in tech can be
         | attributed to these echo chambers. It's a hard problem to
         | solve, especially now with LLMs being force amplifiers to low
         | effort hiring and job seeking attempts. But to not solve this
         | problem will, I think, continue to make increasingly unwell
         | companies and unwell industries as the "meme pool" gets very
         | shallow.
        
       | mnmnmn wrote:
       | Good signal to never work there
        
       | august- wrote:
       | has anyone actually gotten hired through one of these ai
       | interviews? curious if companies even review the recordings or if
       | it's just a filter to reduce applicant volume
        
       | tomhow wrote:
       | URL changed from https://schwarztech.net/snippets/i-was-
       | interviewed-by-an-ai-..., which is just a snippet from this
       | article.
       | 
       | Submitters, please always submit the most original source for a
       | story.
        
       | voganmother42 wrote:
       | In the shell game podcast in season 2, the company (of ai agents)
       | hire a human intern, its weird.
        
       | pedalpete wrote:
       | I have a friend who was working in this space in 2019.
       | 
       | Their customers were hiring something like 10k jobs worldwide
       | annually, which means 500k+ applications to go through.
       | 
       | AI was used for the first filter to get a person through to later
       | rounds.
       | 
       | It makes sense at that scale, and not for "hiring" but just to
       | make decisions as to who gets to the next round.
       | 
       | The alternative is that you end up having to hire so many people
       | to go through the applicants and then those people get bored of
       | asking the same initial questions again and again.
       | 
       | I remember hearing an anecdote, back in the days of paper
       | resumes, that hiring managers would take the huge stack of
       | resumes they got, divide them in half and throw half in the bin.
       | That half would be considered unlucky, and you don't want to hire
       | unlucky people.
       | 
       | But seriously, with the number of job applicants, for certain
       | positions, what are the alternatives to getting AI to help?
        
       | franktankbank wrote:
       | If it was a phone call would you know for sure if it wasn't
       | disclosed? I won't do pre-recorded videos and I won't knowingly
       | interview with an AI ... I don't think, but maybe they'd have
       | more clues about the difference between java and javascript,
       | compatible skillsets for competing technologies etc.
        
       | another-dave wrote:
       | Not sure if ironic or dystopian that one of the companies
       | offering this service is called Humanly
        
       | skar07 wrote:
       | If they can't even be bothered to interview and do the due
       | diligence themselves, perhaps they can just hire an AI bot to do
       | the job as well, and add more AI slop to their work
        
       | ptrl600 wrote:
       | Bring on the AI interviews. I can memorize all the trivia they
       | want. At least then I have a fighting chance, otherwise it's no
       | interview with no reason given. More productive to sweet talk
       | clankers.
        
       | rvz wrote:
       | The AGI utopia, even the recruiters have been replaced by AI.
       | 
       | "Abundance" they told us.
        
       | tartoran wrote:
       | How long till you can rent a bot do it for you and take you to
       | the stage that you deal with humans? I find this type of AI bot
       | interview disrespectful of candidates's time.
        
       | ZiiS wrote:
       | An interview is a two way communication.
        
       | tombert wrote:
       | Six years ago, I applied for a job that made me record ten five-
       | minute videos answering their questions.
       | 
       | It was a colossal pain in the ass, and I wasn't allowed to go
       | back and retake. I'm not actually talking to a human, so my
       | rambling nature kind of took over, and don't know if I really
       | ever answered the questions because I didn't have any ways of
       | clarifying the questions and "course correcting".
       | 
       | They never got back to me, so maybe they're still considering me
       | :).
       | 
       | Though that's not nearly as bad as Canonical's awful process.
        
       | hereme888 wrote:
       | So it failed the turing test?
        
       | nlawalker wrote:
       | The linked article is just a wordy pointer to the video, which is
       | in fact an interesting look.
       | 
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtIUQhb2h3A
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2026-03-11 23:00 UTC)