How do you square that against receiving, literally, 500 fake resumes, mostly from Indians, on day one? They all match the job posting.

You can’t filter by name because that’s discrimination. I suspect AI is being used to eliminate the fraud, this exact scenario.

AI can’t, yet, be accused of breaking equal opportunity employment laws.

▲

nijave 6 days ago | parent [-]

Well, I suppose same way you reduce spam and abuse anywhere else.

Raise the cost enough it's not worth it. Some middle ground could be requiring mailed in applications. That's a marginal cost for a real applicant but a higher cost for someone trying to send swathes of applications out.

It might seem backwards but there are plenty of solid non technical solutions to problems.

You could also do automated reputation checks where a system vets a candidate based on personal information to determine if they are real but doesn't reveal this information in the interview process.

That's how all government things tend to work (identity verification)

▲

geraldwhen 6 days ago | parent | next [-]

The people are usually real in my experience, although I’ve dealt with fake people a few times. Different person showing up to the office vs the video interview, man obviously just off camera giving answers. That second one is probably AI now.

HR attempts to prescreen on resume match. I’ll never see the person who matches on half the skills and is a real person. I’ll only see the fraud until I accidentally find someone who has ever used the technologies on their resume.

▲

ixsploit 5 days ago | parent | prev [-]

> Raise the cost enough it's not worth it.

Which is exactly what is happening here.

	▲	nijave 5 days ago \| parent [-]
		It sounds like they've gone and done it backwards. Raised the cost of legitimate applicants while keeping the cost the same for the spammers