That's what people on both side have been doing for at least couple years already.

Recruiters scan resumes for the best match with LLMs, candidates use the same LLMs (there's only like 3 of them) to tweak their resume for better match. I don't know what research you need to see why that makes sense.

▲

yagi0x00 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

This indicates that resumes created by the same model may have an advantage over those created by other model, so I suppose technically you may have a small advantage if an insider tells you the resume parsing tool is powered by Gemini as opposed to the other models.

My broader discomfort is that we are still learning about model biases while human biases are arguably better understood, and I don't like the ethics of rejecting a person based on criteria I don't fully understand.

	▲	drillsteps5 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I wasn't saying that this is the optimal solution (it clearly is not). I was saying that it makes perfect sense for both sides - HR has their work automated and candidates have better chance to be noticed - and therefore became a common practice in many places. The well has been already poisoned, to survive you have to get in on the action. Don't want to play this game? Make connections, set up the network, and use it to get/stay employed.

▲

aDyslecticCrow 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

It further makes expecting or spending the effort hand writing a proper introduction useless. Which then undermine the entire purpose of it.