Do corporations use my google searches as data to hire me?

well_ackshually a day ago | parent | next [-]

Do you have any proof they don't? Do you have any proof the "AI System" that they use to filter out candidates doesn't "accidentally" access data ? Are you willing to bet that Google, OpenAI, Anthropic, Meta, won't sell access to that information?

Also, in some cases: they absolutely do. Try to get hired in Palantir and see how much they know about your browsing history. Anything related to national security or requiring clearances has you investigated.

▲

linkregister a day ago | parent | next [-]

The last time I went through the Palantir hiring process, the effort on their end was almost exclusively on technical and cultural fit interviews. My references told me they had not been contacted.

Calibrating your threat model against this attack is unlikely to give you any alpha in 2026. Hiring at tech companies and government is much less deliberate than your mental model supposes.

The current extent of background checks is an API call to Checkr. This is simply to control hiring costs.

As a heuristic, speculated information to build a threat model is unlikely to yield a helpful framework.

▲

bossyTeacher 18 hours ago | parent [-]

>the effort on their end was almost exclusively on technical and cultural fit interviews

How could you possibly know if they use other undisclosed methods as part of the recruitment? You are assuming Palatir would behave ethically. Palantir, the company that will never win awards based on ethics

▲

basket_horse 14 hours ago | parent [-]

You’re over thinking it. Like all top tech companies, they just want the best engineers.

▲

tl 13 hours ago | parent | next [-]

On the contrary, they hire the trendiest: https://danluu.com/programmer-moneyball/

	▲	basket_horse 12 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Yeah this seems accurate, I just mean they aren’t looking at your google searches when deciding if they should hire you.

▲

well_ackshually 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Ah yes, Palantir is "just" a tech company.

Notwithstanding the fact that tech companies hire dogshit employees all the time and the vast majority of employees of any company of size 1000+ are average at best, Palantir happens to be rating so high on the scale of evil that I'd pop champagne if it got nuked tomorrow.

If any company would do it, it would be Palantir.

	▲	basket_horse 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		That’s the point. If any company would do it, it’s Palantir, and they don’t. In fact it’s quite the opposite. Their negative public image makes hiring more difficult causing them to accept what they can get. Also, I’m not saying they have the best talent, just that they want the best talent.

▲

raw_anon_1111 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

As if any company that did that is a company I would want to work for.

For instance back when I was interviewing at startups and other companies where I was going to be a strategic hire, I would casually mention how much I enjoyed spending time on my hobbies and with my family on the weekend so companies wouldn’t even extend an offer if they wanted someone “passionate” who would work 60 hours a week and be on call.

▲

two_tasty a day ago | parent [-]

I certainly understand this perspective.

But is it really so hard to imagine a world where your individual choice to "opt-out" or work for companies that don't use that info is a massive detriment to your individual life? It doesn't have to be every single company doing it for you to have no _practical_ choice about it (if you want to make market rate for your services.)

▲

raw_anon_1111 a day ago | parent [-]

I live my life by the “Ben Kenobi” principal. I’m 51, when things go completely to shit, I’ll just go out and live as a hermit somewhere.

▲

ares623 18 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Ah the ol’ “fuck you got mine” approach

▲

raw_anon_1111 17 hours ago | parent [-]

Exactly what am I suppose to do? I vote for politicians who talk about universal healthcare, universal child care, public funding of college education and trade schools etc.

But the country and the people who could most benefit from it are more concerned with whatever fake outrage Fox News comes up with an anti woke something or the other.

So yeah, if this is the country America wants, I’m over it. I’ve done my bid.

While other people talk about leaving the country, we are seriously doing research and we are going to spend a month and a half outside of the US this year and I’ve already looked at residency requirements in a couple of countries after retirement including the one we are going to in a month and a half.

	▲	acuozzo 10 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> Exactly what am I suppose to do? I think GP is suggesting that you're supposed to do something akin to what Ben Kenobi did while aboard the Death Star, not what he did beforehand. This, in no way, represents my own feelings or opinion on this matter. I'm just trying to aid the conversation.

▲

cindyllm 18 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[dead]

▲

ffsm8 a day ago | parent | prev [-]

[flagged]

▲

smsm42 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Probably not directly, that would be too vulnerable. But they could hire a background check company, that could pay a data aggregator to check if you searched for some forbidden words, and then feed the results into a threat model...

▲

Aurornis 16 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

No they do not.

Anyone who has worked in hiring for any big company knows how much goes into ensuring hiring processes don't accidentally touch anything that could be construed as illegal discrimination. Employees are trained, policies and procedures are documented, and anyone who even accidentally says or does anything that comes too close to possibly running afoul of hiring laws will find themselves involved with HR.

The idea that these same companies also have a group of people buying private search information or ChatGPT conversations for individual applicants from somewhere (which nobody can link to) and then secretly making hiring decisions based on what they find is silly.

The arguments come with the usual array of conspiracy theory defenses, like the "How can you prove it's not happening" or the claims that it's well documented that it's happening but nobody can link to that documentation.

	▲	cindyllm 15 hours ago \| parent [-]
		[dead]

▲

Aurornis 18 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I'm kind of amazed that so many people in this comment section believe their Google searches and ChatGPT conversations are being sold and used.

Under this conspiracy theory they'd have to be available for sale somewhere, right? Yet no journalist has ever picked up the story? Nobody has ever come out and whistleblown that their company was buying Google searches and denying applicants for searching for naughty words?

▲

nyrikki 17 hours ago | parent [-]

Google "doesn't sell your data" but RTB leaks that info, and the reason no one is called out for "buying Google searches and denying applicants for searching for naughty words" is because it is trivial to make legal.

It is well documented in many many places, people just don't care.

Google can claim that it doesn’t sell your data, but if you think that the data about your searches isn't being sold, here is just a small selection of real sources.

https://www.iccl.ie/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/Mass-data-bre...

And it isn't paranoia, consumer surveillance is a very real problem, and one of the few paths to profitability for OpenAI.

https://techpolicy.sanford.duke.edu/data-brokers-and-the-sal...

https://stratcomcoe.org/cuploads/pfiles/data_brokers_and_sec...

https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/26AmendedCompla...

https://epic.org/a-health-privacy-check-up-how-unfair-modern...

▲

Aurornis 17 hours ago | parent [-]

> and the reason no one is called out for "buying Google searches and denying applicants for searching for naughty words" is because it is trivial to make legal.

Citation needed for a claim of this magnitude.

> It is well documented in many many places, people just don't care.

Yes, please share documentation of companies buying search data and rejecting candidates for it.

Like most conspiracy theories, there are a lot of statements about this happening and being documented but the documentation never arrives.

▲

nyrikki 15 hours ago | parent [-]

Like most cults, you ignore direct links with cites from multiple governments agencies, but here is another.

https://www.upturn.org/work/comments-to-the-cfpb-on-data-bro...

> Most employers we examined used an ATS capable of integrating with a range of background screening vendors, including those providing social media screens, criminal background checks, credit checks, drug and health screenings, and I-9 and E-Verify.29 As applicants, however, we had no way of knowing which, if any, background check systems were used to evaluate our applications. Employers provided no meaningful feedback or explanation when an offer of work was not extended. Thus, a job candidate subjected to a background check may have no opportunity to contest the data or conclusions derived therefrom.30

If you are going to ignore a decade of research etc... I can't prove it to you.

> The agency found that data brokers routinely sidestep the FCRA by claiming they aren't subject to its requirements – even while selling the very types of sensitive personal and financial information Congress intended the law to protect.

https://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/newsroom/cfpb-propo...

> Data brokers obtain information from a variety of sources, including retailers, websites and apps, newspaper and magazine publishers, and financial service providers, as well as cookies and similar technologies that gather information about consumers’ online activities. Other information is publicly available, such as criminal and civil record information maintained by federal, state, and local courts and governments, and information available on the internet, including information posted by consumers on social media.

> Data brokers analyze and package consumers’ information into reports used by creditors, insurers, landlords, employers, and others to make decisions about consumers

https://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/cfpb_fcra-nprm...

And that CFPB proposal was withdrawn:

https://www.consumerfinancialserviceslawmonitor.com/2025/05/...

Note screen shots of paywalled white papers from large HR orgs:

https://directorylogos.mediabrains.com/clientimages/f82ca2e3...

Image from here:

https://vendordirectory.shrm.org/company/839063/whitepapers/...

But I am betting you come back with another ad hominem, so I will stay in the real world while you ignore it, enjoy having the last word.

	▲	rendaw 13 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		You keep straying from the question. The question was: who has access to google searches? RTB isn't google searches. Background screening isn't google searches. Social media isn't google searches. Cookies aren't google searches. etc etc Every link you provided is for tangential things. They're bad, yes, but they're not google searches. Provide a link where some individual says "Yes, I know what so-and-so searched for last wednesday."
	▲	Aurornis 39 minutes ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Where in your post are Google searches used? Can you answer this question without walls of unrelated text, ad hominem attacks (saying I’m in a cult), or link bombing links that don’t answer the question? It’s a simple question. You keep insisting there’s an answer and trying to ad hominem me for not knowing it, but you consistently cannot show it.

▲

anal_reactor a day ago | parent | prev [-]

Not yet. But Google itself would ask you for your resume if you happened to search for a lot of things related to programming.

▲

LPisGood a day ago | parent | next [-]

Yes, I remember a friend that interned there a couple times showed me that. One of them was “list comprehensive python” and the Google website would split in 2 and give you some really fun coding challenges. I did a few, and you get 4(?) right you get a guaranteed interview I think. I intended to come back and spend a lot of time on an additional one, but I never did. Oops

	▲	anal_reactor a day ago \| parent [-]
		I think I only did three or something and I didn't hear back from them. Honestly my view of Google is that they aren't as cool as they think they are. My current position allows me to slack off as much as I want and it's hard to beat that, even if they offer more money (they won't in the current market).

▲

Aurornis 18 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

"Ask you for your resume" is a funny way of saying "Show an advertisement to invite people to apply for a job"

▲

a day ago | parent | prev [-]

[deleted]