While we encourage people to use AI systems during their role to help them work faster and more effectively, please do not use AI assistants durin
0 items
-
$0.00
0
Be the first to know the latest updates
Whoops, you're not connected to Mailchimp. You need to enter a valid Mailchimp API key.
26 Comments
sd9
Good luck with that
aprilthird2021
That's totally reasonable, imo. You also can't look up the answers using a search engine during your application to work at Google
muhehe
Seems reasonable.
firtoz
It's also a personal question, not a "why should someone work here", but a "what motivates YOU"
sigmoid10
This is quite a conundrum. These AI companies thrive on the idea that very soon people will not be replaced by AI, but by people who can effectively use AI to be 10x more productive. If AI turns a normal coder into a 10x dev, then why wouldn't you want to see that during an interview? Especially since cheating this whole interview system has become trivial in the past months. It's not the applicants that are the problem, it's the outdated way of doing interviews.
aw4y
this remember me an old interview, years ago, when they asked me to code something "without using Google"….
rapidaneurism
Do they also promise not to use ai to evaluate the answers?
OsrsNeedsf2P
> please do not use AI assistants during the application process. We want to understand your personal interest in Anthropic without mediation through an AI system, and we also want to evaluate your non-AI-assisted communication skills. Please indicate 'Yes' if you have read and agree.
Exact opposite of our application process at my previous company. We said usage of ChatGPT was expected during the application and interview phase, since we heavily rely on it for work
aabhay
It’s always the popular clubs that make the most rules
nialse
It makes sense. Having the right people with the right merits and motivations will become even more important in the age of AI. Why you might ask? Execution is nothing when AI matures. Grasping the big picture, communicating effectively and possessing domain knowledge will be key. More roles in cognitive work will become senior positions. Of course you must know how to make the most out of AI, but it is more interesting what skills you bring to the table without it.
sshine
> please do not use AI assistants during the application process. We want to understand your personal interest in Anthropic without mediation through an AI system, and we also want to evaluate your non-AI-assisted communication skills.
There are two backwards things with this:
1) You can't ask people to not use AI when careful, responsible use is undetectable.
It just isn't a realistic request. You'll have great replies without AI use and great replies with AI use, and you won't be able to tell whether a great reply used AI or not. You will just be able to filter sludge and dyslexia.
2) This is still the "AI is cheating" approach, and I had hoped Anthropic to be thought leaders on responsible AI use:
In life there is no cheating. You're just optimizing for the wrong thing. AI made your homework? Guess what, the homework is a proxy for your talent, and it didn't make your talent.
If AI is making your final product and you're none the wiser, it didn't really help you, it just made you addicted to it.
Teach a man to fish…
Ekaros
Why aren't they dog fooding? Surely if AIs improve output and performance they should readily accept input from them. Seems like they don't believe in their own products.
avereveard
Evaluators neither but here we are
fancyfredbot
If I want to assess a candidates performance when they can't use AI then I think I'd sit in a room with them and talk to them.
If I ask people not to use AI on a task where using AI is advantageous and undetectable then I'm going to discriminate against honest people.
nejsjsjsbsb
Not new they had that 5 years ago at least.
Anthropic interview is nebulous. You get a coding interview. Fast paced, little time, 100% pass mark.
Then they chat to you for half an hour to gauge your ethics. Maybe I was too honest :)
I'm really bad at the "essay" subjects vsm the "hard" subjects so at that point I was dumped.
sussmannbaka
slop for thee but not for me
foul
Don't get high on your own supply, like zuck doing the conquistador in Kaua'i
rixed
I understand why it's amusing, but there is really nothing to see here.
It could be rephrased as:
« The process we use to asses candidates relies on measuring the candidate's ability to solve trivia problems that can easily be solved by AI (or internet search or impersonation etc). Please refrain from using such tools until the industry come up with a better way to assess candidates. »
Actually, since the whole point of those many screening levels during hiring is to avoid the cost of having long, in depth discussions between many experts and each individual candidates, probably IA will be the solution that makes the selection process a bit less reliant on trivia quizz (a solution that will, no doubt, come with its own set of new issues).
noncoml
If Alice can do better against Bob when they aren’t using AI, but Bob performs better when both use AI, isn’t it in the company’s best interest to hire Bob, since AI is there to be used during his position duties?
If graphic design A can design on paper better that B, but B can design on the computer better than A, paper or computer, why would you hire A?
alex1138
I generally trust Anthropic vs others, I think Claude (beyond obligatory censorship) ticks all the right boxes and strikes the right balance
1GZ0
You wouldn't show up drunk to a job interview just because its at brewery, would you?
ReptileMan
Much better approach is to ask the candidate about the limitations of AI assistants and the rakes you can step on while walking that path. And the rakes you have already stepped on with AI.
neilv
Kudos to Anthropic. The industry has way too many workers rationalizing cheating with AI right now.
Also, I think that the people who are saying it doesn't matter if they use AI to write their job application might not realize that:
1. Sometimes, application questions actually do have a point.
2. Some people can read a lot into what you say, and how you say it.
CaptainFever
> While we encourage people to use AI systems during their role to help them work faster and more effectively, please do not use AI assistants during the application process. We want to understand your personal interest in Anthropic without mediation through an AI system, and we also want to evaluate your non-AI-assisted communication skills. Please indicate 'Yes' if you have read and agree.
Full quote here; seems like most of the comments here are leaving out the first part.
ben30
This application requirement really bothered me as someone who's autistic and dyslexic. I think visually, and while I have valid ideas and unique perspectives, I sometimes struggle to convert my visual thoughts into traditional spoken/written language. AI tools are invaluable to me – they help bridge the gap between my visual thinking and the written expression that's expected in professional settings.
LLMs are essentially translation tools. I use them to translate my picture-thinking into words, just like others might use spell-checkers or dictation software. They don't change my ideas or insights – they just help me express them in a neurotypical-friendly format.
The irony here is that Anthropic is developing AI systems supposedly to benefit humanity, yet their application process explicitly excludes people who use AI as an accessibility tool. It's like telling someone they can't use their usual assistive tools during an application process.
When they say they want to evaluate "non-AI-assisted communication skills," they're essentially saying they want to evaluate my ability to communicate without my accessibility tools. For me, AI-assisted communication is actually a more authentic representation of my thoughts. It's not about gaining an unfair advantage – it's about leveling the playing field so my ideas can be understood by others.
This seems particularly short-sighted for a company developing AI systems. Shouldn't they want diverse perspectives, including from neurodivergent individuals who might have unique insights into how AI can genuinely help people think and communicate differently?
hhthrowaway1230
This has a poetic tone to it.
However, not sure what to think of it. So AI should help people on their job and their interview process, but also not? When it matters?