If the writing test stated Do Not Use AI ...

[Anonymous]

Call in your too candidates and give them a writing test done in person. Problem solved.

[Anonymous]

top*

[Anonymous]

For some reason, pieces I write gets flagged as 80–90% AI-generated. I think it’s a combination of having grown up in another country where language and writing structure were taught rigorously, plus the vocabulary I’ve built from reading a lot and speaking several languages. I wouldn’t rely too much on those checkers as the best writers can easily get flagged simply because their writing is that good.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is not a job for someone who's good at prompts. Sure, there are jobs for prompt-writers, but this is a job for an actual writer. We need to stand out in a field where all our competition sounds the same.

Yes, the checkers can be wrong, but that isn't a reason to stop using them, it's a reason to do multiple checks and to assess the results with a critical eye. So if Candidate A was 100% AI across all tools, only an idiot would say "but but but the checkers could be wrong!" Same with Candidate B, who was 0% AI across all tools. Why on earth would I look at that and say "hmmm this reads like a human to me and to the tools, but the checkers could be wrong!" Candidate C, now... Candidate C might have 10% on one tool, 0% on another tool, and 15% on the last tool. I'll assume that candidate C used an AI for formatting or similar, and if their other criteria were strong, not dismiss them automatically.

If the problem is that the text sounds the same, the checkers are irrelevant.

[Anonymous]

Twenty years from now everyone will laugh about our attempts to prohibit AI like it's cheating. It's like saying not to cheat by using the internet for research. Totally not related to the real world.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Call in your too candidates and give them a writing test done in person. Problem solved.

This. My DS went to Catholic schools and all graded writing occurred in class on paper with no aids allowed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Twenty years from now everyone will laugh about our attempts to prohibit AI like it's cheating. It's like saying not to cheat by using the internet for research. Totally not related to the real world.

+1. You should want your candidates to leverage current technologies. Evaluate them on their final product, not how you think they got to it. Is it a good piece? Great! Who cares if AI was involved? Is it crap? Then don't hire them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Checkers can still be wrong--and I love the em dash.

I love the Oxford comma. That's another marker.

Why, OP, did you prohibit AI use? What were you trying to see?

Because success here relies heavily on the ability to stand out of the crowd. LLM product is by definition average. Also, this is a leadership role, and a lazy person who uses AI to deliver minimum viable product will get eaten alive by our staff.

[Anonymous]

OP, respectfully, you are not going about this job search in a productive way. You should evaluate the writing for what you received. It doesn’t matter if an alien beamed down and gave it to this person. if the person submitted it thinking it was their best effort then that is what should be evaluated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Twenty years from now everyone will laugh about our attempts to prohibit AI like it's cheating. It's like saying not to cheat by using the internet for research. Totally not related to the real world.

+1. You should want your candidates to leverage current technologies. Evaluate them on their final product, not how you think they got to it. Is it a good piece? Great! Who cares if AI was involved? Is it crap? Then don't hire them.

Man, I wish my workplace was as simple as yours!

You know how all political campaign speeches sound exactly the same? They always have to some degree, but it's gotten way worse with AI. So much so that even foreign politicians are starting to sound like American politicians. Our business relies on hitting different. AI by definition can't do that. And frankly, someone who thinks it's appropriate to use AI in this professional context shouldn't be here. They have misunderstood the role for which we're hiring.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, respectfully, you are not going about this job search in a productive way. You should evaluate the writing for what you received. It doesn’t matter if an alien beamed down and gave it to this person. if the person submitted it thinking it was their best effort then that is what should be evaluated.

You are very confident for someone who doesn't even know what professional field I'm in.

[Anonymous]

I think you’d be foolish to drop a candidate based on an AI checker. Find another way to test your candidate.

[Anonymous]

I write papers for school all the time. Turnitin highlights my original work as AI to the point where I have to dumb down my papers to get a passable score to turn in my work. Those checkers are inaccurate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Twenty years from now everyone will laugh about our attempts to prohibit AI like it's cheating. It's like saying not to cheat by using the internet for research. Totally not related to the real world.

+1. You should want your candidates to leverage current technologies. Evaluate them on their final product, not how you think they got to it. Is it a good piece? Great! Who cares if AI was involved? Is it crap? Then don't hire them.

Man, I wish my workplace was as simple as yours!

You know how all political campaign speeches sound exactly the same? They always have to some degree, but it's gotten way worse with AI. So much so that even foreign politicians are starting to sound like American politicians. Our business relies on hitting different. AI by definition can't do that. And frankly, someone who thinks it's appropriate to use AI in this professional context shouldn't be here. They have misunderstood the role for which we're hiring.

Then find a topic too obscure for AI and ask them to write about that. AI checkers are not reliable, especially for strong writers.

[Anonymous]

Everyone is telling you to just look at the quality of the writing independent from whether it's AI.