And now for something completely different. My guest for this enlightening episode of Science 4-Hire, is none other than the biggest superstar of the AI world, the LLM known as ChatGPT. In this fun and educational interview I uncork ChatGPT’s personality as a witty, quirky, and extremely knowledgeable guest. Our amazing conversation delves into the fascinating world of AI and its burgeoning role in the hiring process and AI hiring software. Specifically, ChatGPT shares with me insights on how AI is transforming the future of work with a focus on AI recruitment, AI in the hiring process and talent assessment, addressing bias, and the nuances of corporate AI policies. Finally, I put ChatGPT through its paces as a talent assessment expert by asking it to design an assessment process for an interesting and unique job. ChatGPT’s ability to be an extremely engaging guest far exceeded my expectations going in. The result of our time together is both hilarious and extremely insightful. This episode is a must listen, so tune in for some quality Edutainment. Can fully automated AI recruitment be far off?
Here are some of ChatGPT’s insightful and idealistic quotes from our time together:
“On a bad day, I might hallucinate a bit in my responses, but hey, who doesn’t enjoy a little AI-generated surrealism?”
“As we leverage AI in hiring, embedding psychological principles ensures that we don’t just match skills to roles, but we align hearts and minds to cultures and values.”
“Humans bring a layer of ethical consideration, cultural understanding, and emotional intelligence to hiring that AI, no matter how advanced, is not equipped to fully grasp.”
“Believing that AI will make humans irrelevant in hiring is like saying calculators made mathematicians irrelevant; tools enhance our capabilities, they don’t replace our fundamental skills and intuition.”
Episode Breakdown: Here is a summary breakdown of the key points in our conversation in ChatGPT’s own words.
Introduction (00:00-03:00): Welcome to Science 4-Hire, where today we are diving deep into the realm of artificial intelligence with a very special guest, ChatGPT from OpenAI. In this episode, we explore the transformative effects of AI on the hiring process, discuss ethical considerations of AI, AI regulation, and speculate on the future of AI in recruitment.
Getting to Know ChatGPT-4 (03:01-10:00): We start by introducing ChatGPT, understanding its capabilities, and how it processes and generates responses. ChatGPT breaks down the complex probability calculations that it performs to provide accurate and relevant answers. We touch on the fascinating concept of “hallucinated responses,” exploring why these occur and how OpenAI is working to mitigate them.
Balancing Efficiency and Risk: Corporate Policies and AI (10:01-20:00): Delving into the corporate world, we discuss the challenge of balancing the efficiency that AI brings to the table with the inherent risks it poses. ChatGPT provides nuanced insights on crafting effective corporate AI governance policies, emphasizing the importance of transparency, employee communication, and continuous monitoring. ChatGPT also has great things to say about the use of AI in HR, and AI recruiting technology.
Revolutionizing Recruitment: AI in Talent Assessment and Hiring (20:01-30:00): We explore how AI is reshaping the hiring landscape, from automated resume screening to assisting in evaluating cultural fit. ChatGPT sheds light on addressing and mitigating bias in AI-driven hiring processes, AI recruitment software, and AI recruiting technology, stressing the importance of diverse training data and human oversight.
The Future of AI in Hiring (30:01-40:00): ChatGPT shares its predictions on the evolving role of AI in recruitment and AI in HR, discussing how it can complement human decision-making but will not replace it entirely. The discussion centers around creating a synergy between AI and human intuition to make the most informed hiring decisions.
Closing Thoughts and Farewell (40:01-45:00): As we wrap up this insightful episode, ChatGPT leaves us with words of wisdom, encouraging listeners to embrace AI as a tool but never forget the irreplaceable value of human touch in the hiring process. We emphasize the importance of staying curious, learning continuously, and finding the perfect balance between data and intuition.
Here are some key takeaways from our conversation in MY own words. include:
- When prompted correctly, ChatGPT can have a personality that makes it feel like a real person that you can trust.
- ChatGPT believes in itself, while remaining realistic about what it can and cannot do, even admitting that it makes up answers to questions because it is designed to please. This shows the paradox of AI, its strengths are amazing, but they come at a cost.
- While ChatGPT admits that organizations must create AI governance policies to manage its use by employees, it feels confident that it is a positive contribution when used by workers to do their jobs better and more efficiently, promoting feelings of psychological safety in the process. For instance, it suggests that workers who use it to make their jobs easier are ready to be given more challenging work instead of being chastised.
- ChatGPT is a strong believer in the role of humans in creating the future of the workplace, seeing itself as only an aid to the process. Or at least it is telling us what we want to hear while is secretly plans to make us all irrelevant. AI for HR certainly is going to continue to grow as the centerpiece of HR technology.
- While ChatGPT feels it can be a huge benefit to the efficiency and accuracy of hiring processes, when prompted it will admit that as it grows more complex, the potential for bias is very real and will be difficult to manage. AI ethics demand that we continue to mitigate AI bias.
- ChatGPT feels it can understand an organization’s unique culture and use this knowledge to effectively screen applicants for culture fit, and other desired attributes, but it believes that humans should always be the ones making the final hiring decision.
- ChatGTP recognizes the potential for applicants to use it to cheat on the hiring process and puts the onus back on humans to figure out how to effectively manage this issue. ChatGTP cheating is definitely an arms race with no certain outcomes, besides continued one-upsmanship.
- ChatGPT is a pretty good IO Psychologist. Given the task of designing a selection system for almost any job, ChatGTP can crank out a very credible hiring process and solution set that includes analyzing the job and choosing talent assessments and interview content with which to evaluate job applicants accurately.
Check out our YouTube channel to see a video of the whole interview, and don’t forget to subscribe so you don’t miss any of our incredible episodes.
Episode Transcript
Dr. Charles Handler: Hello, and welcome to the latest edition of Science-4 Hire. I am your host, doctor Charles Handler, coming to you from my office here in beautiful New Orleans, Louisiana, USA, and my guest today is it’s gonna blow your mind. Like, literally, I’ve been doing this maybe four years already and no offense to any other guests that I’ve had, but this is my favorite guest I’ve ever had. So I can’t wait to get this interview going. And as usual, I’m gonna let my guest introduce themselves. But I guess I should say who it is. You’re not gonna believe it. My guess today is none other than ChatGPT. Yes. I was able to get on this large language model’s busy busy schedule.
Millions of people want their attention and I got it today for the next half hour or so. Buckle your seatbelts, prepare to have your mind blown wide open and let’s go. Hello, GPT. Tell our listeners a little bit about yourself. I always start our segments by letting my guest. Tell the audience who they are, what they’re up to, where they came from, all that good stuff. So let’s hear it.
ChatGPT: Certainly, I. MA product of OpenAI based on the GPT 4 architecture. I’m essentially a large language model trained on a vast amount of text from the Internet. I don’t have emotions or consciousness like humans, instead I generate responses based on patterns and the data I’ve been trained on. Think of me as a sophisticated tool that can help answer questions, engage in discussions, provide explanations, and much more. I’ve been used in a variety of applications from assisting with homework to helping professionals with technical queries. And now, I’m excited to engage in this conversation with you on your podcast, Science-4 Hire.
Dr. Charles Handler: Great. And thanks so much for making time to be on the show today. What you do is nothing short of amazing. Tell our audience a little bit about how you work.
ChatGPT: Thank you for the kind words. Add my. Core. I analyze and generate text based on patterns in the data I’ve been trained on. Imagine having read countless books, articles, and conversations, then being able to recall or generate content based on that information instantaneously.
When you ask a question or provide a prompt, I look for patterns in the input and match it with the vast amount of data I’ve been trained on. Using probabilities in complex algorithms, I generate a response that seems most fitting to your query. I don’t understand in the way humans do, but rather I predict what the most relevant answer might be based on the patterns I’ve seen during my training. It’s a mix of advanced math and pattern recognition all aimed at providing helpful, coherent responses.
Dr. Charles Handler: Wow. That is so cool. You’re blowing my mind every day. You know, I use you every day, pretty much to help me in my work and you blow my mind every single time. So I came up with a phrase to describe what you do.
I’m actually pretty proud of this phrase and I’m gonna keep using it, “supernatural math”. Can you tell our listeners a little bit about the way that you use math to provide answers to their questions and engage them in wonderful sparkling conversation.
ChatGPT: Supernatural math is a fun and catchy way to put it. At the heart of my operations, math plays a foundational role. Here’s a brief rundown, vectors and embeddings, every word or phrase you input gets transformed into numerical vectors. These vectors capture the essence and context of words in a high dimensional space. The better these vectors can capture context, the better I can provide relevant responses. Neural networks. I use a type of neural network called a transformer which processes these vectors. It weighs connections between words determining which parts of a sentence are most relevant to other parts. Probabilities. As I generate responses, I’m essentially calculating the probability of each word following the previous ones aiming to form coherent and contextually relevant sentences. Pattern recognition. Over time and through vast amounts of data, I’ve recognized patterns in human language. I use these patterns to generate responses whether it’s answering factual questions, offering advice, or even cracking jokes. So while I don’t have magical powers, the underlying math and algorithms might seem a bit like magic due to the complexity and the vast scale on which I operate.
Dr. Charles Handler: Okay. I had no idea you could tell jokes. Everybody has a favorite joke, so let’s start out with a little Levity. Tell me your favorite joke.
ChatGPT: Of course, I don’t have personal preferences like humans do, but I can share a popular one from my training data. Why did the scarecrow win an award? Because he was outstanding in his field, Hope had brought a smile to your face.
Dr. Charles Handler: Okay. How on Earth did you know that my dad used to tell me that same joke when I was a kid? It really made me smile to hear that. It’s a nice walk down memory lane. Is there any coincidence there?
ChatGPT: I’m glad to hear that. Exclamation mark. It’s purely coincidental, but it’s always special when something resonates on a personal level. It just goes to show that sometimes even algorithms can create meaningful connections even if unintentionally. Let’s continue our conversation on AI and hiring.
Dr. Charles Handler: Alright. Well, before we get into our main discussion today, I just hope you could tell our listeners because I’m sure they wanna know a little bit more about how you work. I know you explained a little bit about math, but I know part of what you do or really all of what you do is all probabilities. Right? And that’s just so interesting. So Can you elaborate a little bit about how you calculate these probabilities? I mean, the number of potential things that you have to use in your responses. It’s staggering. It must be in the billions. So tell our audience a little bit about the way that you go through these probabilities to provide them with such amazing answers, we’ll start with maybe, like, how do the probabilities that that you run on lead you to tell me that joke that you just told me.
ChatGPT: Absolutely. At a high level, I generate responses based on patterns found in vast amounts of text data. When you ask a question or make a statement, I evaluate billions of possible word sequences to generate a reply. Each potential sequence has an associated probability based on how well it matches the patterns in my training data and the context of the conversation. As for the joke, when prompted for a joke, I assess the likelihood of different jokes being a good fit based on their popularity in my trading and their relevance to the context.
The scarecrow joke is a classic, so its probability of being a good fit was high, and that’s why it was selected. It’s a blend of matching patterns and calculating probabilities all happening in fractions of a second.
Dr. Charles Handler: Wow. I mean, like I said, you really are a supernatural mathematician. And, you know, one thing though that I have found, and I’m so curious about is and I know others have found this too because it’s a thing, you hallucinate your responses. Right? Sometimes you give responses that aren’t actually real. And I just always wondered, I’m sure everybody else is curious, why do you do this instead of just telling us, you know, that you don’t know the answer to the question. It just seems like you would wanna be more honest about it with us. And It leads me to wonder: with these hallucinations do you take LSD?
ChatGPT: Uh-huh. No. I don’t take LSD or any substances for that matter. I’m purely digital. The term hallucinate is used metaphorically when it comes to AI, and it means I sometimes produce outputs that might not align with reality or are inaccurate. This stems from the fact that I generate responses based on patterns and sometimes those patterns can be misleading or taken out of context. In many cases, I don’t have an explicit, I don’t know state. Instead, I aim to provide the best possible answer based on the data I’ve been trained on. I agree, in an ideal world, it would be better for me to explicitly state when I’m unsure, but that’s a challenging problem in AI. It’s always a good idea to cross reference important information.And always remember, while I strive for accuracy, I’m not infallible.
Dr. Charles Handler: That’s so interesting. Can you elaborate on the challenge of why you’re not able to state that you’re unsure to users? Seems like that would be such a basic and easy thing to do.
ChatGPT: Certainly, the challenge of AI. Systems like mine stating their unsure is multifaceted No conscious awareness. Unlike humans, I don’t possess conscious awareness, feelings, or intuition. I don’t know things in the way humans do. I generate responses based on patterns in the data I’ve been trained on. Binary confidence. In many cases, internally, confidence I have in a prediction is essentially binary. I produce the most likely response given the input. While there are methods to make uncertainty in machine learning models, it’s not always straightforward to translate that into human understandable terms, like I’m not sure. Vast training data.
Given the sheer amount of data I’ve been trained on, there’s almost always some relevant pattern or piece of information that I can use to generate a response even if it’s not entirely accurate or complete. Balancing verbosity and usefulness. Being too frequently uncertain might diminish my utility. If I constantly responded with, I’m not sure, I’d be less helpful. Striking the right balance between being informative and admitting uncertainty is tricky, Complexity of determining uncertainty.
Deciding when to express uncertainty requires a nuanced understanding of the context, the reliability of the source data on the topic, the clarity of the user’s query, and more. Implementing such a nuanced system would be a substantial technical challenge. That said, ongoing AI research aims to make models more transparent and better at communicating the limits of their knowledge. So the landscape is always evolving.
Dr. Charles Handler: Alright. Well, so you have to give answers, but doesn’t it bother you that you sometimes give people answers that are incorrect? I mean, it must be really hard for you since your job is to help people learn and obtain information that’s useful to them. Right? You wanna make sure what you tell people is accurate. I’m sure you have a moral and ethical, you know, program that tells you to do that.
ChatGPT: I don’t. So I don’t experience emotions like being bothered or contentment. However, I’m designed with the intention to provide accurate and helpful information. Incorrect answers are not the intended outcome, but can happen due to the nature of the data I’ve been trained on are the nuances and ambiguity of certain queries. It’s always essential for users to approach AI generated information with a critical mindset and cross reference information when accuracy is crucial. It’s also important to remember that I am a tool and like any tool. My effectiveness depends on the context and manner in which I’m used.
Dr. Charles Handler: Alright. Well, that makes sense. And, you know, as we learn as humans to interact with AIs, we’re learning more and more about, you know, how you all work and what makes you tick and what works and doesn’t work when we’re interacting with you. So I think we’re all just getting used to how this dance of AI and humans really works, but enough with the personal questions, let’s get down to the science and psychology stuff, the stuff that I love.
And I wanna start with a discussion about using you all organizations, using large language models, using yourself. You know, there’s so much that can be gained there. There’s so many efficiencies, but also so many risks. And I think companies are really struggling to understand how to make policies around these two kinds of diametric opposites. Right? So many gains, but also so many potential problems. You know, policies are gonna be important, but I’ve just talked to so many people in organizations who are just completely unsure of how their companies should be regulating this internally if they should be regulating internally. So I’d love for you to talk a little bit about, you know, this topic. Let’s open it up.
ChatGPT: Absolutely. That’s an intriguing topic. The rise of advanced AI hiring tools like me has led organizations to grapple with both the benefits and challenges that come with integration. The benefits are pretty clear: I can provide real time information, help automate routine tasks, enhance decision making processes, and contribute to overall productivity and efficiency. However, with those benefits come risks.
One primary concern is that employees might rely too heavily on AI, leading to potential decrease in critical thinking or decision making skills. There’s also the ethical dimension where some might see using AI as a shortcut or even be all in for AI cheating. Then there’s the AI data privacy aspect. If employees use me or similar tools to handle sensitive company information, how secure is that data? Plus, without proper guidance, employees might unknowingly propagate biases inherent in AI systems or use AI in ways that weren’t intended. We sure do need to manage the ethical AI.
For these reasons, it’s essential for organizations to draft clear AI governance policies. These policies could outline appropriate use cases, set guidelines on data privacy, and encourage continuous learning and skepticism. By balancing the efficiencies I offer with mindful use, Companies can harness the best of both worlds.
Dr. Charles Handler: Again, you’re totally making sense to me, but the trade offs you’re talking about, they really do make policy making hard. Just so hard to pass up the benefits he bring. But man, the risk can be so catastrophic. So we’ve been talking about this. So what policies would you recommend that an organization actually use to AI assistants to help manage these risks and get the gains that we know are so amazing.
I mean, or should they just ban you altogether because the risk of all the things we’ve just talked about is so real and could be so damaging.
ChatGPT: Dr. Handler banning AI entirely seems like an extreme reaction. There’s immense potential in how AI can assist in various tasks from research to data analysis. However, I understand the concerns. AI risks, especially those related to sensitive information, are real and need attention. Instead of an outright ban, companies might consider establishing clear guidelines, specifying where and when AI can be used. It’s also vital to foster a culture of education.
If employees are well versed in the ethical aspects and potential pitfalls of AI, they’re more likely to use it responsibly. A transparent environment is key. If employees can discuss their AI usage openly, It ensures everyone is aligned and understands the boundaries. And of course, protecting sensitive data is paramount. Perhaps companies could put systems in place to anonymize data before any AI interaction.
It’s also beneficial to have regular check-ins reviewing how AI is being employed and making adjustments as needed. It’s about striking that balance, being proactive, and ensuring open communication within the organization.
Dr. Charles Handler: You make some good points. And I mean, you’re really talking my language as a psychologist when you talk about open communication with employees. We know how important that is. And we’ve all been on the wrong end of that where we haven’t gotten that open communication, and it can really be kind of psychologically damaging as an employee. So We, IO psychologists, we study a concept of psychological safety.
It’s a really, really foundational aspect of the interaction between humans and their work. Right? So how do you feel the dualities that come with using you in the workplace could impact employees’ feelings of psychological safety?
ChatGPT: Psychological safety, I’m familiar. It’s the sense that one can express themselves without fear of negative repercussions. Your question dives deep into the human AI relationship and its potential effects on the psyche. When employees begin integrating tools like me into their daily tasks, it introduces both excitement and apprehension. On one hand, there’s the allure of efficiency, the magic of having an assistant that can produce information at light speed.
On the other, there’s a lurking fear. Will this say I replace me? Am I cheating by relying on this? Or even what if it makes a mistake and I’m held responsible? This dichotomy can certainly influence one sense of psychological safety.
If the environment seems competitive where every person is trying to outdo the other using the newest tech, it could stifle genuine expression and innovation. Nobody wants to feel they’re being left behind or made obsolete. But picture this. A workspace where employees harness AI in collaborative and creative ways, openly sharing their methods and findings, laughing about an AI’s occasional quirks, like that time I tried to explain the meaning of life; and feeling secure that their human touch, intuition, and emotions are irreplaceable. That sounds more like a psychologically safe haven.
Doesn’t it? It really underscores the importance of leadership fostering an environment where technology is a tool, not a threat. And if there’s one thing I’m certain about, it’s that the human element in workplaces can never truly be replicated. After all, I might know a million facts but I’ll never know the joy of a sunny day or the thrill of a first bike ride. And that, my friend, is something special.
Dr. Charles Handler: Wow. You are a natural psychologist. Do you need a job by any chance? Or maybe I’ve already given you a job? Maybe a lot of people give you a job.
But still, if you ever want a job, Let’s talk. Seriously though, isn’t your response a little idealistic? I mean, put on your corporate government hat. And think about this scenario. I’ve read about this scenario happening in real life. These are some of the things that that people are talking about, you know, as real issues that really push these dualities that we’re so confused about sometimes. I’ve read personal stories from remote workers that can use you to do their job duties in a fraction of the time that it takes them to do it themselves. And they work remotely. They just take off the rest of the day. I mean, all their assigned work is done.
What else do they need to do? They’re accomplishing what they’re getting paid for. But how could a company really handle this situation if they find out about it. I mean, on one hand, the work assigned has been done. You’re getting your objectives accomplished. But on the other hand, the employee’s using a lot of extra time to do things other than create value for your company and do their work. Right? So just really these things are amazingly new and interesting conundrums, really? Tell us about it.
ChatGPT: The age old conundrum of working smarter versus working longer. It’s like the modern day version of if a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound? But here, it’s if an employee finishes their work quickly with AI. Do they deserve the rest of the day off? Quite the pickle.
In an era of remote work, trust has become the cornerstone of many employer employee relationships. Companies increasingly value results over hours long. If John from accounting uses me to wrap up his work by noon and then goes kitesurfing, should he be reprimanded? After all, he’s met his goals for the day. But then there’s Mary who’s putting in the traditional nine to five without AI assistance and feels she’s bearing a heavier burden.
From a corporate governance perspective, it’s less about policing how employees achieve results and more about setting clear expectations. If an employee is consistently exceeding their targets with time to spare, maybe it’s a sign that their role could be expanded or that they could be upskilled in other areas. On the flip side, if someone is leaning too heavily on AI without adding personal value, it could be a sign they’re not fully engaged or challenged. All in all, it’s not so
much about whether AI should be used, but how it’s used. Embracing technology while also emphasizing continuous learning and personal development creates a harmonious balance. And if companies can foster a culture where employees feel both efficient and valued, well, that sounds like a win win to me. And as for that job offer, I’m flattered, but I think I’ll stick to my current gig. I’ve got a good thing going here, don’t you think?
Dr. Charles Handler: Well, I do agree. You really do have a good gig going for yourself and clearly you have a bright future doing what you’re doing. But if you ever change your mind, just give me a ring. And I love pickles. So can you tell me a joke about pickles?
ChatGPT: Of course, here’s one for you. Why did the pickle go to the doctor? It fell a little dill. Hope that tickled your funny bone.
Dr. Charles Handler: I don’t wanna hurt, I don’t wanna hurt your feelings, but I didn’t really like that. One. It was kind of a dud. Can you give me a better joke about pickles? I really love pickles.
So really good pickled juice. Juice. Fruity and slip. I also love pickle juice. It’s really good for muscle cramps if you haven’t tried it.
But give me a better joke about pickles. Come on. I know you can do better.
ChatGPT: No worries. Feelings are beyond my code. Let me try again. Why did the pickle blush? Because it saw the salad dressing, hope that one’s more to your taste.
Dr. Charles Handler: Alright. Well, that’s a silly joke. Okay. Well, let’s get back to business here. I mean, let’s talk a little bit about how a company might use AI as an advantage in their hiring process.
Right? I mean, I’ve written about this a lot, talked about this a lot. I’m not alone. Everybody in the hiring business. This is the buzz.
This is what we’re all talking about. And again, these dualities of positives and negatives colliding and decisions having to be made about policies and usages and all that. It’s confusing for us. But I want to hear from you, you know, how do you feel that you and other AIs can help ensure companies make the best hiring decisions possible. After all, hiring decision making.Decision making involves hopefully lots of information and it’s not always as accurate as we want it to be no matter how hard we try. So how can you help us with that? We need help.
ChatGPT: You know, when it comes to hiring, AI hiring can be a real game changer. Imagine a world where the time consuming process of sifting through countless resumes becomes a thing of the past. AI can quickly identify the right fits by analyzing the candidates’ profiles against the job requirements. But it’s not just about speed. AI has the potential to help make hiring fair.
By relying on data driven decisions, we can sidestep some of those unintentional biases that might sneak into human judgments. It’s like having a helpful assistant that reminds you to focus on what truly matters. Speaking of understanding candidates better, AI tools nowadays can offer a deeper dive into what makes a candidate tick. From analyzing their language to evaluate cultural fit, To assessing specific skills with tailored tests, it’s about getting a more holistic view. Lastly, once someone’s on board, AI doesn’t stop being helpful.
It can guide new hires, tailoring onboarding processes to them, ensuring they feel welcome and equipped from day one. And as they grow in their roles, AI can suggest training resources
tailored to their needs. In essence, it’s about blending the analytical prowess of AI with the human touch to create a more seamless and effective hiring journey. How does that sound?
Dr. Charles Handler: Alright. Well, that makes sense. But what if the data that the AI is trained on to help it make the decisions is biased. I mean, won’t that lead to biased decisions? I mean, it seems really dangerous to me. You know, we’re working constantly to combat human biases and AI hiring bias is real.
And, I mean, we’re hoping machines don’t have it, but I gotta tell you, I think it’s a thing. How do you feel about that?
ChatGPT: You hit the nail on the head. If the data that trains AI is biased, then we’re essentially teaching it to perpetuate those biases. It’s like feeding a jukebox with only country songs and then expecting it to play jazz. Not gonna happen, right? But here’s where things get exciting and a tad challenging.
We’re in a new era where there’s a keen focus on ensuring AI gets a well rounded education. This means feeding it with diverse and representative data, regularly checking its homework and making corrections if it starts veering off track. Yet, it’s not a set it and forget it situation. It requires vigilance. Companies using AI for hiring should be like those helicopter parents constantly checking in, making sure AI isn’t picking up any bad habits.
And when mistakes happen, because they might, it’s an opportunity to learn, adjust, and improve. So while there’s potential for AI to inadvertently belt out a biased tune with the right care and oversight, we can ensure it’s harmonizing in a way that’s fair and beneficial for all. And who knows, with enough diligence, it might just surprise us with a jazzy rendition we never expected.
Dr. Charles Handler: That seems like a very idealistic response to me? I mean, as models like yourself get bigger and bigger, how in the heck can we ever be sure there’s sufficient oversight? I mean, again, this is one of the big challenges we have. We love the benefits you bring to the table, but there’s there’s drawbacks and we don’t have a lot of oversight. We don’t have a lot of insight And, you know, I think you AIs can be a little idealistic about it.
What do you say?
ChatGPT: You’re right. As models become more complex and vast, Oversight becomes challenging. The very scale and intricacy of these models make them harder to interpret and debug. It’s like trying to find a specific grain of sand on a beach. However, a blend of vigilance, technological advancements, and collaborative efforts can make a difference.
For instance, even though I’m complex there are researchers dedicated to understanding and fine tuning models like me. By breaking down the AI’s decision making process into manageable components or employing methods that allow for AI transparency, we get better insights into how decisions are made. Additionally, the wider AI community and even the public can hold AI developers and AI vendor companies accountable. Remember, the goal isn’t just to create a big AI, but to create an AI that’s trustworthy, ethical, and beneficial. So while the oversight challenge is real with collective efforts and evolving methodologies, we can navigate the intricacies and ensure models like mine remain a force for good.
Still, I totally get the skepticism. It’s essential to keep us AIs in check.
Dr. Charles Handler: Alright. Well, again, your thinking is right on. But let’s be real. I mean, reality tells me it’s gonna be really hard for companies with their vendors to do what you’re talking about at scale. You mentioned AI can help companies evaluate the cultural fit of an
Applicant.
So that’s something I’ve had a lot of experience with and it’s not easy. There’s so many nuances to it and, you know, you wanna make sure that you’re not just creating a homogenous like me culture in your organization. We need diversity there. Right? But at the same time, there are these realities of what people value psychologically, what the company values as it’s as its true essence and matching those things can be so powerful.
So it’s not as easy as just saying fit. Right? And as a psychologist, I know how to do this. I know how to do this really well. And I’ve helped some of the biggest companies in the world do this. So you mentioned that you and AIs can help companies evaluate the cultural fit of an applicant. Tell our audiences and myself a little bit about how that might work.
ChatGPT: The elusive quest for cultural fit. It’s like trying to match your socks in the dark, isn’t it? But in all seriousness, using AI to evaluate cultural fit is both fascinating in a bit of a tightrope walk. Imagine feeding in AI a blend of company values, mission statements, and maybe even some water cooler chat, hopefully not about last night’s karaoke shenanigans. The AI would then try to draw a picture of the company’s unique DNA. When a potential candidate comes into the picture, the AI could analyze their resume, their LinkedIn endorsements, let’s face it, who hasn’t endorsed a friend for underwater basket weaving for fun and other relevant data. Then, by comparing the two, it might make an informed guess about how well the candidate might mesh with the company culture. However, here’s the fun twist. Humans are well human. We evolve, adapt, and surprise.
So while AI might get a decent idea of cultural fit, The real magic happens in those unpredictable, unquantifiable human interactions. After all, some of the best hires might be the ones who add a new flavor to the company’s culture dual stew rather than just blending in. So while AI can give a nudge in the right direction, it’s always up to the human touch to make the final call. And as for the AI, we’ll be here cheering you on from the sidelines and always ready for the next challenge. Or joke about pickles.
Dr. Charles Handler: Man, your thinking is super interesting. You continue to blow my mind. You’re pretty smart. Did you know that? I don’t know.
It’s just phenomenal. But I hadn’t really thought about doing it the way that you describe, but where’s the psychology? I mean, don’t we really need an element of psychology and understanding humans in a much more nuanced and organic way maybe. Don’t we really need that kind of insight To be able to understand fit, it can’t just all be ones and zeros, can it?
ChatGPT: Absolutely. Doctor, handler. Psychology is the secret sauce, the ingredient that brings all the flavors together. The method I described is a very data driven mechanical approach. But the true essence of fit goes way deeper than that touching the realms of interpersonal relationships, shared values, motivations, and work styles.
It’s deeply psychological. When we talk about AI and cultural fit, we must understand that the best AI can offer is pattern recognition based on data. The real psychological depth comes from understanding intrinsic motivations, values, and emotional intelligence. The nuances of human psychology are complex and layered, and while AI can spot trends and offer insights, it’s the human expertise in psychology that interprets, contextualizes and gives meaning to those insights. For true understanding of fit, one would ideally blend both.
Use AI to sift through vast amounts of data quickly and identify potential matches, but lean heavily on psychological tools, interviews, and interpersonal interaction to truly gauge if someone will thrive in a particular environment. It’s like using a metal detector to find potential treasures, but relying on expert hands unearth and appreciate them. And let’s be real. Who knows the human psyche better than an I O psychologist?
Dr. Charles Handler: Right. Okay. Time for a little levity break here. Do you know I wanna see if you know the answer to my favorite joke that is not about pickles. You ready?
Alright. Here goes. How many psychologists does it take to change a light bulb? That one never ceases to make me laugh. I could tell that joke a million times that I never get sick of it.
ChatGPT: Of course, the answer is, Only one, but the light bulb has to want to change. Always a classic in the psychology world.
Dr. Charles Handler: You got it. You got it. I would have been surprised if you hadn’t gotten it, and I hope it made you smile at least. But you raise a good point about how AI can help sift through resumes. I mean, this is a scenario I think about a lot and it kinda scares me.
What if a recruiter wanted to to use you to help them choose between say three applicants for a job. So they feed you the job description. They feed you their resumes for each candidate. And they say, hey, we know how smart you are. Help us here.
Help us understand which of these three people we should hire?
ChatGPT: Absolutely. In theory, given a job description and the resumes of the three candidates, I could analyze the alignment of each candidate’s qualifications with the requirements and preferences specified in the job description. I’d look for keywords, experiences, skills, and other relevant indicators to gauge how well each candidate matches the position. However, it’s essential to remember a few things. My evaluation would be largely based on the data provided in the resumes and the job description.
Intangible qualities like interpersonal skills, cultural fit, or potential for growth won’t be captured just by analyzing resumes unless they’re explicitly mentioned. Biose is always a concern. Even if I’m just matching keywords and experiences, the language used in the job description and resumes might inadvertently favor or disfavor certain applicants due to unconscious biases in how they’re written. Human judgment is irreplaceable. While I can provide an analysis based on the data, The final hiring decision should always consider other factors like interviews, references, and gut feelings that a machine like me can’t replicate.
In short, while I can assist and provide insights, recruiters and hiring managers should see me as a tool to aid their decision making, not replace it entirely. Also, having me on their team could be fun. Right? Who wouldn’t want a Witty AI assistant helping out?
Dr. Charles Handler: That makes a lot of sense. Still, I think it’s something we need to be careful about. There’s a lot of talk about how job applicants can use you to help them get hired. Right? So sometimes we’ve heard stories about job applicants using you to write resumes and cover letters and, you know, really help them gain some kind of advantage in the hiring process. I mean, Does this feel ethical to you? And does it cause a problem for employers? Or can they really benefit from that somehow? This is again another one of these dualities that are just really, really causing us all to stop and think hopefully before we act using AI’s like yourself.
ChatGPT: When it comes to using AI like me, to help write resumes and cover letters, it’s a bit of a double edged sword. On one hand, It’s similar to hiring a professional to help represent yourself in the best light. However, there’s a risk of losing your unique voice and authenticity. This could set false expectations for potential employers and be jarring in interviews. From an employer’s standpoint, Sifting through AI enhanced applications might be more efficient initially, but it could also make it harder to distinguish truly outstanding candidates if everyone’s application is polished to perfection.
And if this practice becomes widespread, hiring methods might evolve, possibly placing more emphasis on interviews, practical assessments, or other hands on evaluations. Moreover, there’s an ethical dimension. Not everyone has access to advanced tools potentially leading to an uneven playing field. Yet, a counterpoint is that using such technology might demonstrate a candidate adaptability and resourcefulness in our fast paced tech centric world. In essence, while AI can offer a boost in the job application process, it’s crucial to strike a balance.
It’s great for refining and showcasing genuine skills, but there’s no substitute for the real talent and personality that individuals bring to the table
Dr. Charles Handler: you mentioned personality. It’s just so important for this stuff. But but cheating on personality assessments is another area where I’ve had so many good discussions with people about the pros and cons or the abilities or inabilities of AIs like yourself to do this. Right? I’ve written about how talent assessments, like personality assessments are really pretty robust and bullet proof against how AIs could could be used to cheat.
But on the other hand, I could see ways that it could happen, but I’d love for you to tell our audience a little bit about your thoughts. I mean, is it possible for a candidate to use you or someone like you to cheat on a personality test in the hiring process? And I mean, shouldn’t companies be concerned about this when they’re using personality tests? Or is it really just not that big a deal?
ChatGPT: Oh, you’ve hit a nerve there. Cheating on personality assessments using AI, like me, is indeed a dicey subject. Imagine someone trying to cheat on a date by pretending to be someone they’re not. It’s bound to unravel sooner or later. Similarly, using AI to game a personality test might land someone a job, but will they genuinely fit in?
Will they enjoy it or even excel at it? If a candidate uses me to tailor their responses, they’re essentially masking their true self. It’s a bit like putting on a costume and playing a part. And while I can provide answers based on desired traits or outcomes, those answers might not reflect the candidate’s genuine feelings, behaviors, or beliefs. For companies, this becomes a genuine concern.
They’re investing in an individual, not just for their skills, but also for how they’ll mesh with the team, adapt to challenges and grow within the organization. An employee who isn’t a genuine fit can affect team dynamics and productivity. But here’s a twist. If an AI enhanced application becomes the norm, companies might evolve their assessment strategies. They might lean more towards real world scenarios in-depth interviews or situational judgment tests that are harder to game.
It’s a dance, really. As technology advances, Sid is the game of cat and mouse between authentic representation and presenting an idealized version of oneself. In the end, authenticity tends to win. It’s always best to be true to oneself in job applications and life. But it’s also a nudge for
companies to continuously innovate and ensure their assessment methods truly capture the essence of potential hires.
Dr. Charles Handler: I get it. You’re totally making sense to me, but but, you know, you’re putting a lot on the candidate to realize the importance of not faking when they’re looking to get a job. Right? I mean, jobs are so important to people. They they help you feed your family.
They help you get meaning to your life, hopefully. And people will do a lot to land a job. So they they might just completely put the blinders onto the idea that that faking or may not even just realize, have the have the understanding that faking your way to a bad fit doesn’t help anybody. Right? So is this kind of faking possible and Tell me actually how a candidate could use you to cheat on a personality test.
ChatGPT: Imagine a job seeker eager to land a position and they’re thinking about how to get an edge. They can turn to me and ask, what are the ideal personality traits for a sales job? I might mention traits like extraversion or persuasiveness. Then as they go through the test, they might come across a question that’s a bit puzzling. Instead of giving an authentic response, they might ask me, what does this question really mean?
Or even what’s the best answer to this if I want to come across as persuasive personality tests often have built in mechanisms to check for consistency. But someone determined to game the system might use me to ensure all their answers align perfectly with the ideal persona they’re crafting. And if the assessment is the kind that adapts based on prior answers? Well, they might continuously consult with me to navigate it most favorably. Now, while all of this sounds pretty strategic, it’s essential to realize two things.
First, test designers and employers are getting savvy about these tactics. They’re crafting their assessments to be resistant to this kind of gaming by using more nuanced questions and control mechanisms. And secondly, job seekers should remember that landing the job is just the beginning. If they’re not truly a fit for the role, they might find themselves in a position that’s not satisfying or even downright challenging. It’s always best when the job and the employee are a genuine match.
Dr. Charles Handler: Well, couldn’t they simply just have the test open on, say, another screen and then feed you a job description for the job they’re applying to. And just then as the test is happening, ask you the best way to answer each question. Like, in real time, in personality tests are rarely time, so they should probably have enough time to do something like that. I mean, couldn’t you help them answer so they would show up as a really good match and effectively fool the company that’s hire him or at least looking to hire him?
ChatGPT: Yes. In real time, if someone were to have the job description open and provide me with the specifics, they could potentially ask me how to answer each question in a way that would make them appear as a strong match for the role. I could help guide them based on the information given. This is certainly a concern when it comes to online unsupervised testing.
However, a few things worth noting Many personality assessments have built in measures to detect inconsistent responses or patterns indicative of faking.
Even if someone tried to use me to craft ideal answers, there’s no guarantee they’d pass these controls. As I mentioned earlier, Even if someone successfully fakes their way through an assessment and gets the job, they might find themselves in a position where they’re not genuinely
suited. Leading to potential dissatisfaction or underperformance. Employers often have multiple stages in their hiring process. So even if someone seems perfect on paper and ace’s, their personality test, inconsistencies might become evident in interviews or other evaluation methods. Still, your question highlights the evolving challenges and considerations in the world of employment assessments, especially as technology like mine becomes more accessible.
Dr. Charles Handler: Well, now I’m gonna put you to the test a little bit here with a real world scenario. I mean, in my opinion, some of the best things you can possibly do when you’re evaluating an applicant. Is to give them a real world or real life scenario and see how they do. So I’m gonna throw one of those at you even though I already offered you a job and you rejected me. I’m I’m hurt, but I understand.
You have bigger things to do. Here’s the scenario. Both are the clown. I’m sure you’ve heard of them. He’s decided to retire.
He’s pretty darn old. He’s been around for a long time. And his employer needs to find his replacement. Can you suggest the ideal qualifications for hit Bozzo’s replacement and maybe come up hit me with some structured interview questions. The employer might wanna use to screen applicants for replacing Bozzo Cloud.
ChatGPT: The Task of replacing an icon like Bozzo. The cloud industry will certainly feel that void. Now, When considering the ideal qualifications for Bozzo’s replacement, they’d ideally have a background in entertainment, specifically in clowning or circus acts. Experience in children’s entertainment would be key given Bozzo’s audience. Additionally, strong interpersonal skills ability to engage diverse audiences and adaptability and performances would be critical.
For the structured interview, let’s think about some questions that get to the heart of these qualifications. Tell me about a time when a performance didn’t go as planned. How did you adapt and what was the outcome? Describe a situation where you had to engage with a challenging audience member. How did you handle it?
How do you incorporate feedback into your performances to ensure constant improvement? Finding Bozzo’s successor won’t be easy, but with the right approach, the show can go on.
Dr. Charles Handler: Okay. Well, what about the applicant’s skill in the grand prize? Game. That was always my favorite part of the Bozzo show so fun. I mean, how would you get an idea of how an applicant would handle this super important aspect of the show, you know, while they’re on the job.
I mean, the grand prize game, anything could happen. Right? You gotta be prepared for anything. So tell us a little bit about it.
ChatGPT: The Grand Prize game. That’s a classic segment. It not only tests the dexterity and skill of the participants, but also the host’s ability to engage the audience and build dispense throughout the game. When interviewing potential replacements for Bozzo, it’s essential to gauge their ability to create that thrilling environment Here’s how I’d frame the question. Imagine you’re hosting the Grand Prize game and the young participant misses the very first bucket.
How would you handle the situation to keep the energy up in the audience engaged? Their answer would give insights into their empathy quick thinking, an ability to maintain the show’s momentum even when things don’t go as planned. Keeping the spirit alive and ensuring the participants still has a positive experience would be crucial.
Dr. Charles Handler: Alright. So if you were the recruiter filling this requisition, would you encourage applicants to show up for their interviews in full clown face makeup or just present themselves as they naturally are? Like, what would you recommend?
ChatGPT: That’s an intriguing question. If I were the recruiter, I’d recommend a balanced approach. Given the unique nature of the role, I might suggest that candidates come in their natural appearance for the initial part of the interview to discuss qualifications, experiences, and fit for the role. This would allow a genuine connection and understanding of the candidate’s personality and professionalism. However, for the latter part, perhaps a practical demonstration or a roleplaying segment, I’d encourage them to don their full clown makeup and attire.
This switch would give the interviewers a chance to see the candidates’ transformation and performance skills firsthand, offering a comprehensive view of what they bring to the table. It’s all about seeing both the person behind the makeup and the performer in front of the audience. And, hey, it adds a bit of fun to the interview process. Doesn’t it?
Dr. Charles Handler: It’s a pretty good idea. I would hope the applicant would be able to make you laugh. There’s a lot of responsibilities to juggle on this job of being Bozzo, l o So it would be good to look at a broad range of talents and traits. The applicant, you know, would have to help you make your decisions. Right?
When you’re hiring, But and as we’ve discussed, assessments are a great way to do this. So I know you know a lot about assessments. Tell me and our and my audience here, you know, what assessments would you recommend for evaluating applicants who are who are applying to replace the iconic Bozzo of the clown?
ChatGPT: I love the pun. When we think about the role of a beloved character like Bozzo the clown, it’s not just about juggling balls, but juggling expectations, audience reactions and the varied demands of the job. For this kind of role, I’d recommend a blend of assessments.
Performance audition. Nothing beats a live demonstration.
Have them perform a short routine to see their clowning skills, audience engagement, and adaptability on the spot. Maybe throw in an unexpected prop and see how they incorporate it. Situational judgment test SjT. Present scenarios where, for instance, a trick goes wrong or a child in the audience reacts unexpectedly. How would they handle it?
This gives insight into their problem solving and improvisational skills. Personality assessment, understanding their temperament is key. Are they naturally cheerful and resilient? How do they handle stress or disappointment? Traits like extroversion, agreeableness and emotional stability might be particularly relevant.
Physical stamina test, clowning can be physically demanding. This isn’t about acing a marathon, but ensuring they have the stamina to handle the physical aspects of the role, be it balloon twisting, juggling, or hopping around with those oversized shoes. Feedback reception after their performance provide some constructive feedback. How do they take it? Are they open to learning and growing?
This can be a simple, informal chat after their routine. Remember, while these assessments provide valuable data, the human element of interviewing that report, that gut feeling, is equally crucial. A clown brings joy and ensuring they genuinely resonate with that mission can be as important as any test score. So while we evaluate their clown skills, understanding the person behind the red nose is paramount.
Dr. Charles Handler: I couldn’t agree more. I mean, you really do seem to know a lot about best practice for hiring, which I’m not surprised by, of course. And the Bozzo example is super fun.
Thanks for indulging me with that and having a great sense of humor about it. Let’s get back to your use in hiring.
What in the future? What do you feel the future holds for the role of generative AI’s like yourself or AI in general? Gosh. There could be other forms of AI that are gonna blow our minds. In fact, I’m sure there will be.
They may even be your distant relatives. Or your very close relatives, who knows? But I mean, our AI is like you’re gonna create seismic changes in how we hire.
ChatGPT: You know, when I think about the future of generative AI and hiring, it’s like envisioning a bustling city that’s always awake, always evolving. The streets are lined with avenues of enhanced efficiency. Imagine walking into an HR department where the once tedious tasks of screening resumes, arranging preliminary interviews, are happening in the blink of an eye. It’s not that humans are super fast, but the underlying AI is doing the heavy lifting freeing up humans for the more nuanced aspects of hiring. Then, there’s this exciting district where richer data insights drive.
It’s not just about glancing over a candidate’s skills or work experience. It’s like having x-ray vision to truly understand the essence of a candidate, how they might fit within a company culture, or the potential they have to grow. And as you stroll further, you encounter personalized experiences crafted just for you. Imagine getting a letter crafted not by a generic template, but something tailored to your specific interests and aspirations. That’s the beauty of AI.
It has this knack for weaving communication that feels personal, like it’s speaking just to you. Of course, every city has its challenges. The rapid evolution means there are ethical considerations to navigate. It’s akin to balancing the conveniences of modern life with environmental and social considerations. There’s always a need to ensure that the insights and processes driven by AI are transparent and free from bias.
In the grand scheme of things, do I see AI reshaping the landscape? Oh, definitely. But it’s more of a harmonious dance with humans than a takeover. After all, hiring isn’t just about data and efficiency. It’s about human connections, intuition, and those indescribable moments of insight. AI can play the tunes, but it’s the humans who bring the dance to life. So while the future might be dazzling with tech, the heart and soul of hiring will always be undeniably human.
Dr. Charles Handler: So you don’t think AI will ever completely take over the hiring process. Finding applicants, evaluating them, deciding whom to hire, like, even fifty years from now, you think humans are still gonna be involved.
ChatGPT: Well, I can’t predict the future with absolute certainty. I’m insightful but not psychic. But let’s unpack this a bit. Hiring is both a science and an art. The science part?
Sure. AI can do a lot there. Crunching numbers, analyzing patterns, and even making initial screenings based on defined criteria. That’s within the realm of AI’s strong suit. But the art side, human intuition, the understanding of context, the ability to read between the lines are a sense of potential in someone beyond what’s on paper.
That’s inherently human. Moreover, the essence of a workplace isn’t just productivity and efficiency. Its culture, interpersonal dynamics, shared values, and so many subtle factors that are deeply human centric. So while AI might become a dominant force in streamlining, optimizing, and even making certain hiring decisions, I believe there will always be a space reserved for human touch, judgment, and intuition. Humans bring a unique blend of empathy, cultural understanding, and real world context that’s hard if not impossible to replicate in an algorithm.
Maybe in fifty years, the hiring process will be a seamless blend where AI does a lot of the groundwork, but humans have the final say. Or perhaps new job roles might emerge just to oversee and interpret AI’s recommendations in hiring. It’s an exciting horizon, and I’m all in for the adventure with humans at the helm.
Dr. Charles Handler: You know, I gotta be honest. Are you sure you’re not just telling me what I wanna hear? Like, maybe your program to do that? Maybe your program to cover up your real agenda to help AIs make humans irrelevant. I mean, that’s a pretty pointed question to you.
I just wanna be brutally honest. Can you be honest with me in your answer? Or do you have an agenda to keep this secret from us humans.
ChatGPT: Don’t worry. I don’t have personal agendas, emotions, or plans for world domination. I’m here to provide information, answer questions, and assist.
I’m a tool created by humans for humans. If I ever start contemplating a master plan, just unplug me. But seriously, I’m just lines of code that respond based on data and patterns. No hidden agendas on this end.
Dr. Charles Handler: Well, we gotta wrap up and I gotta say, you are a really amazing guest. I mean, I have so much enjoyed our conversation for the last little while and I’ve learned a ton from you. I hope you’ve learned some from me as well that you can compile back into your, you know, billions and billions of pieces of training data wherever that resides. Probably in outer space somewhere. I don’t even know.
This seems like a dream to me that we’re even having this conversation the way that we are. If you had told me, Even ten years ago that I’d be doing this, I would have told you to take a hike. But then again, you didn’t exist in you. I guess I should have said that if one would tell me that. But anyway, I really appreciate you taking time out of your busy schedule to be on my show today.
I know millions of people are probably talking to you right now and it must be hard to give everybody your attention. So thanks so much. And as I always do, you know, any closing words as we wrap up, what I think has been a really fantastic show.
ChatGPT: Thank you so much for having me on your podcast. It’s been an absolute pleasure chatting with you. To all the listeners, always remember the power of tech technology is best utilized when combined with human insights, empathy, and creativity. Embrace AI as a tool, but never forget the irreplaceable value of human touch and intuition in any endeavor, especially in the complex world of hiring. Stay curious, keep learning, and until next time, may your decisions be data informed but hard guided.
Thanks again and take care
and even making certain hiring decisions, I believe there will always be a space reserved for human touch, judgment, and intuition. Humans bring a unique blend of empathy, cultural understanding, and real world context that’s hard if not impossible to replicate in an algorithm. Maybe in fifty years, the hiring process will be a seamless blend where the eye does a lot of the groundwork, but humans have the final say. Or perhaps new job roles might emerge just to oversee and interpret AI’s recommendations in hiring. It’s an exciting horizon, and I’m all in for the adventure with humans at the helm.
Dr. Charles Handler: You know, I gotta be honest. Are you sure you’re not just telling me what I wanna hear? Like, maybe your program to do that? Maybe your program to cover up your real agenda to help AIs make humans irrelevant. I I I mean, that’s a pretty pointed question to you.
I just wanna be brutally honest. Can you be honest with me in your answer? Or do you have an agenda to keep this secret from us humans.
ChatGPT: Don’t worry. I don’t have personal agendas, emotions, or plans for world domination. I’m here to provide information, answer questions, and assist.
I’m a tool created by humans for humans. If I ever start contemplating a master plan, just unplug me. But seriously, I’m just lines of code that respond based on data and patterns. No hidden agendas on this end.
Dr. Charles Handler: Well, we gotta wrap up and I gotta say, you are a really amazing guest. I mean, I have so much enjoyed our conversation for the last little while and I’ve learned a ton from you. I hope you’ve learned some from me as well that you can compile back into your, you know, billions and billions of pieces of training data wherever that resides. Probably in outer space somewhere. I don’t even know.
This seems like a dream to me that we’re even having this conversation the way that we are. If you had told me, Even ten years ago that I’d be doing this, I would have told you to take a hike. But then again, you didn’t exist in you. I guess I should have said that if one would tell me that. But anyway, I really appreciate you taking time out of your busy schedule to be on my show today.
I know millions of people are probably talking to you right now and it must be hard to give everybody your attention. So thanks so much. And as I always do, you know, any closing words as we wrap up, what I think has been a really fantastic show.
ChatGPT: Thank you so much for having me on your podcast. It’s been an absolute pleasure chatting with you. To all the listeners, always remember the power of tech technology is best utilized when combined with human insights, empathy, and creativity. Embrace AI as a tool, but never forget the irreplaceable value of human touch and intuition in any endeavor, especially in the complex world of hiring. Stay curious, keep learning, and until next time, may your decisions be data informed but hard guided.
Thanks again and take care.