Fake job seekers are flooding US companies that are hiring for remote positions(cnbc.com)
cnbc.com
Fake job seekers are flooding US companies that are hiring for remote positions
https://www.cnbc.com/2025/04/08/fake-job-seekers-use-ai-to-interview-for-remote-jobs-tech-ceos-say.html
263 comments
We've had more than a few in my company. We work in Cybersecurity for the company, so we've definitely seen them and seen the details. I don't actually think they're that hard to avoid .. but to say they're not a problem at all is not fair. I agree with you that if taken the wrong way that this is just ammunition for "return to office" efforts.
A LOT of people are far worse at interviewing than they think they are. And so, a bullshit artist can get hired. Technology now allows these bullshit artists to propagate more, and do more damage than would have previously be possible. AI in the workplace is a similar problem. Can you tell the different between someone who really just leans on ChatGPT all day but is actually incompetent? Probably so, but someone who was that incompetent just wouldn't have previously been able to hang on for quite as long, or deceive so many people.
[edit]
It's clear that my comment was not clearly written -- when I said "A LOT of people are far worse at interviewing than they think they are," I was referring to the people holding the interviews, and not referring to candidates. I'm shocked at just how bad a lot of folks are at holding interviews, and just how misplaced their confidence in their ability seems to be.
A LOT of people are far worse at interviewing than they think they are. And so, a bullshit artist can get hired. Technology now allows these bullshit artists to propagate more, and do more damage than would have previously be possible. AI in the workplace is a similar problem. Can you tell the different between someone who really just leans on ChatGPT all day but is actually incompetent? Probably so, but someone who was that incompetent just wouldn't have previously been able to hang on for quite as long, or deceive so many people.
[edit]
It's clear that my comment was not clearly written -- when I said "A LOT of people are far worse at interviewing than they think they are," I was referring to the people holding the interviews, and not referring to candidates. I'm shocked at just how bad a lot of folks are at holding interviews, and just how misplaced their confidence in their ability seems to be.
> A LOT of people are far worse at interviewing than they think they are.
This works both ways right? Would it be fair to say that interview processes don't differentiate good hires from bullshit artists? Feels like framing the problem differently might make it tractable.
This works both ways right? Would it be fair to say that interview processes don't differentiate good hires from bullshit artists? Feels like framing the problem differently might make it tractable.
They typically don't.
I had to take company training in interviewing. The trainer started out by acting out a fake interview. Then he asked us how we felt about him as a candidate. Pretty much everyone agreed that he nailed the interview. Then he began to list all the things he said and how he answered questions, and it slowly became clear that it was all bullshit, and he never said anything that was a direct answer to any of the interview questions. By using deflection and redirection he was able to completely control the interview and give a glowing impression of himself.
I wish I could remember what company was hired to do that because it was one of the best corporate training experiences of my life.
I had to take company training in interviewing. The trainer started out by acting out a fake interview. Then he asked us how we felt about him as a candidate. Pretty much everyone agreed that he nailed the interview. Then he began to list all the things he said and how he answered questions, and it slowly became clear that it was all bullshit, and he never said anything that was a direct answer to any of the interview questions. By using deflection and redirection he was able to completely control the interview and give a glowing impression of himself.
I wish I could remember what company was hired to do that because it was one of the best corporate training experiences of my life.
>Would it be fair to say that interview processes don't differentiate good hires from bullshit artists?
Anyone involved in interviewing really needs to ask themselves "what are we testing for?" In my world, we require anyone who makes it to the full in-person interview to give a technical talk on any topic they want, followed by Q&A from an audience that has a broad collective knowledge base. This has the benefits of:
- Letting the candidate start the interview on strong ground of their choosing
- Giving both the candidate and the team a chance to talk shop in a way that simulates the day-to-day work context
- Offering an opportunity for the candidate to gauge how curious and cordial their potential future colleagues are
- Making it very obvious if the candidate is BSing if they can't answer live questions about something they chose to present
Anyone involved in interviewing really needs to ask themselves "what are we testing for?" In my world, we require anyone who makes it to the full in-person interview to give a technical talk on any topic they want, followed by Q&A from an audience that has a broad collective knowledge base. This has the benefits of:
- Letting the candidate start the interview on strong ground of their choosing
- Giving both the candidate and the team a chance to talk shop in a way that simulates the day-to-day work context
- Offering an opportunity for the candidate to gauge how curious and cordial their potential future colleagues are
- Making it very obvious if the candidate is BSing if they can't answer live questions about something they chose to present
This sounds terrifying and like something I'd never, ever put in the tons of time to properly prep for for a single company's process just for a chance at a job, but add it to the list of things I'd much prefer to the current system if it were widespread enough I could prep only for that.
If it’s a topic of your choosing, a lot of engineers who aren’t super junior probably have a lot of the fixins for a short technical talk on something of interest even if they haven’t presented at a conference. And even juniors probably have something from school.
Added: I should acknowledge though that talking about technical topics of interest may get more complicated at some proprietary firms than open source ones.
Added: I should acknowledge though that talking about technical topics of interest may get more complicated at some proprietary firms than open source ones.
The first company I worked for out of college did that, as it was a technical position that hired people out of university who studied science and engineering. They had two of us and an interviewer. The other guy gave his presentation on Ruby lasers, but his explanation was a more complex version of "the ruby filters the input light", which is completely incorrect. I tried to hint at that in a question or two, but the interviewer did not have any physics background, and seemed to think it was an informative explanation.
So I'm not sure that this method works if candidates can give talks on subjects the interviewers are unfamiliar with.
So I'm not sure that this method works if candidates can give talks on subjects the interviewers are unfamiliar with.
It may take me a week (or more) to prepare half hour talk. It takes even more time if I have to compress it into less than 20 minutes (think ted talk).
Actually, that sounds brilliant. The only problem is taking into account those that are not good at public speaking.
Is your company hiring?
Is your company hiring?
If I’m hiring “senior” developers, being comfortable communicating technical topics and answering questions is a requirement.
My definition of “senior” is what you will see in the leveling guidelines of most well known tech companies - not “I codez real gud”.
My definition of “senior” is what you will see in the leveling guidelines of most well known tech companies - not “I codez real gud”.
> If I’m hiring “senior” developers, being comfortable communicating technical topics and answering questions is a requirement.
While I agree completely, I also know plenty of people who fit this description, but would probably aren't the folks you ask to give a power point on a technical topic.
TBH I've done my time in management and done my fair share of presentations, but I would HATE this to the point that I might well opt out.
There's a reason I'm not in management anymore, and a presentation like described is a far cry from working with stakeholders and engineers to define and document technical requirements. Or even presenting those to a group with shared context.
I might well take the fact that you've made it a part of the interview process to be an indication that this is a regular job requirement as opposed to something I have to do here and there.
While I agree completely, I also know plenty of people who fit this description, but would probably aren't the folks you ask to give a power point on a technical topic.
TBH I've done my time in management and done my fair share of presentations, but I would HATE this to the point that I might well opt out.
There's a reason I'm not in management anymore, and a presentation like described is a far cry from working with stakeholders and engineers to define and document technical requirements. Or even presenting those to a group with shared context.
I might well take the fact that you've made it a part of the interview process to be an indication that this is a regular job requirement as opposed to something I have to do here and there.
>The only problem is taking into account those that are not good at public speaking.
A very common concern, but overblown in my experience. If you notice, I never actually said "judge the candidate's presentation skills" (or anything of the sort) in why I think this process is great. The presenation is really just level-setting; the candidate gets to set the topic and give sufficient context for a conversation to occur. The presentation is at most the first 15 minutes out of a ~3 hour in-person interview process. That's how little it matters.
It's the Q&A and subsequent discussions that matter.
A very common concern, but overblown in my experience. If you notice, I never actually said "judge the candidate's presentation skills" (or anything of the sort) in why I think this process is great. The presenation is really just level-setting; the candidate gets to set the topic and give sufficient context for a conversation to occur. The presentation is at most the first 15 minutes out of a ~3 hour in-person interview process. That's how little it matters.
It's the Q&A and subsequent discussions that matter.
The problem is that interviewers have a strong tendency to judge candidates based on whether they come across as self-confident, even when instructed not to. It's possible to get people to not do this, but it requires fairly rigorous training. tptacek wrote about this a decade ago: https://sockpuppet.org/blog/2015/03/06/the-hiring-post/
I'd argue the "presentation and Q&A" format addresses that directly. The candidate gets to pick exactly what the interview is going to be about, at least at the beginning, so they have full control over first impressions. No gotchas at all. Who wouldn't pick something they're confident about?
If someone thinks Cmake is super cool and knows all sorts of great use cases for it, then they should present that. They should also be prepared to answer open-ended follow-up questions like "broadly speaking, how could a project transition from something like Automake to Cmake?" or "what are some footguns in Cmake and how can we avoid them?"
If someone thinks Cmake is super cool and knows all sorts of great use cases for it, then they should present that. They should also be prepared to answer open-ended follow-up questions like "broadly speaking, how could a project transition from something like Automake to Cmake?" or "what are some footguns in Cmake and how can we avoid them?"
Those sound like very good adjustments.
The idea is to pick a topic you're so jazzed about that your enthusiasm overrides The Fear.
One of the things I like to do on the hiring side is hold interviews in the smallest room people won't complain about. The way we think about public speaking has a lot to do with how close we are to each other.
One of the things I like to do on the hiring side is hold interviews in the smallest room people won't complain about. The way we think about public speaking has a lot to do with how close we are to each other.
> A LOT of people are far worse at interviewing than they think they are.
A LOT of interviews are one-sided bully sessions, so people don't jump through the hoops they are expected to.. especially in hazing-friendly cultures like the security and finance sectors
A LOT of interviews are one-sided bully sessions, so people don't jump through the hoops they are expected to.. especially in hazing-friendly cultures like the security and finance sectors
No disagreement there. The best way to get honest information from people is NOT to really leverage the power balance over them and try to "catch" them in an interview. People also commonly mistake "the stuff I know" for "general intelligence," and so they incorrectly think that their interview questions really tell them very much about a candidate.
Just spent a day coding in C using intrinsics with the help of ChatGPT - trying to get it to produce results - purely as an experiment, and i can say someone who'd copy-paste from it without understanding things, will never pass an interview with me and i'm by far not the toughest guy to get through.
There's not much incentive for the median industry engineer to develop meaningful skill as a panelist.
I think that's fine, but I would expect people to have a realistic appraisal of their skillset (or lack of skillset) -- it's the self knowledge gap and false confidence which is the problem.
Sure, but who's in the picture to provide the quality of feedback that allows for that kind of realistic self-appraisal to develop?
I've had candidates I knew 15 minutes into the session I would sell a panel on "no hire" for, still say I was the best interview they've ever done in their life. This is not so much because I'm actually good at it, but going by the substantive content of that and much other feedback I've received especially in the last four years, I earn these rave reviews instead mainly because:
- I'm not afraid to admit where a candidate knows more than I do, and
- when someone seems so nervous it may be confounding their performance, I gently remind them that I've been through this before, it's hard on everyone and I don't hold that against people, and it's okay if they need to take a deep breath and recenter.
It's systemic, and it isn't even about being able to derive a reliable signal from the interaction. The problem is way more fundamental, in the same sense that you don't fix "Lord of the Flies" by reminding everyone regularly to be polite and not swear.
I mean, as I've just discussed, I can't even trust the good feedback I get from candidates, because any signal on actual improvements I could make is totally swamped by the noise of people practically ready to lick a hand in exchange for not being treated like something you'd scrape off a boot heel.
Which is also not something I hold against anyone on an individual level. The system that so consistently produces such outcomes is another matter. I used to think it was shameful people so rarely bother to represent their company in a good light, in the one formal occasion when most engineers ever actually do so. But in retrospect, I think I was the one who was wrong: the median level of representation in this area is more or less exactly accurate to what is deserved.
I've had candidates I knew 15 minutes into the session I would sell a panel on "no hire" for, still say I was the best interview they've ever done in their life. This is not so much because I'm actually good at it, but going by the substantive content of that and much other feedback I've received especially in the last four years, I earn these rave reviews instead mainly because:
- I'm not afraid to admit where a candidate knows more than I do, and
- when someone seems so nervous it may be confounding their performance, I gently remind them that I've been through this before, it's hard on everyone and I don't hold that against people, and it's okay if they need to take a deep breath and recenter.
It's systemic, and it isn't even about being able to derive a reliable signal from the interaction. The problem is way more fundamental, in the same sense that you don't fix "Lord of the Flies" by reminding everyone regularly to be polite and not swear.
I mean, as I've just discussed, I can't even trust the good feedback I get from candidates, because any signal on actual improvements I could make is totally swamped by the noise of people practically ready to lick a hand in exchange for not being treated like something you'd scrape off a boot heel.
Which is also not something I hold against anyone on an individual level. The system that so consistently produces such outcomes is another matter. I used to think it was shameful people so rarely bother to represent their company in a good light, in the one formal occasion when most engineers ever actually do so. But in retrospect, I think I was the one who was wrong: the median level of representation in this area is more or less exactly accurate to what is deserved.
> I'm shocked at just how bad a lot of folks are at holding interviews, and just how misplaced their confidence in their ability seems to be.
They've all drunk the leetcode / cs question koolaid, instead of just talking about projects, and how they would solve some things, and checking their personality (this is like 70% of the weight for me for new team members) if nobody likes you because of your attitude / personality, you'll bring down the team with your personality.
They've all drunk the leetcode / cs question koolaid, instead of just talking about projects, and how they would solve some things, and checking their personality (this is like 70% of the weight for me for new team members) if nobody likes you because of your attitude / personality, you'll bring down the team with your personality.
>I'm shocked at just how bad a lot of folks are at holding interviews, and just how misplaced their confidence in their ability seems to be.
Age old question, who will judge the judge?
Age old question, who will judge the judge?
You ask the 3rd person to be present/to review the interview later. It is not perfect but it may provide a necessary perspective.
> Can you tell the different between someone who really just leans on ChatGPT all day but is actually incompetent?
More relevant question: even if you can easily tell the difference, can you convince the person who makes the hiring decisions that your colleague is incompetent and only relays words to/from ChatGPT?
More relevant question: even if you can easily tell the difference, can you convince the person who makes the hiring decisions that your colleague is incompetent and only relays words to/from ChatGPT?
My experience was similar but with on/offshore companies in India. We just started requiring camera on (it was pre-pandemic) and it was obvious if candidates knew their stuff or were just prepped and/or reading responses. Most of those contracts were setup where the company was providing a "service" with fake cost recovery wordings if the service was not provided. Money only went one way, the contracts had wording about penalty payback but the reality after talking with people in finance was the financial process/systems weren't setup for that, lol.
Ways to combat bait and switch is to alter interview questions, add new questions to every interview, ask deeper level questions, and observe the candidate in how they respond. It should be a more conversational tone the entire time, random discussion paths pursued, especially if the candidate's interests perk up about something. Every candidate has a different background so getting them to talk about that and problems they solved and diving into those in detail should be a good gauge of ability.
Ways to combat bait and switch is to alter interview questions, add new questions to every interview, ask deeper level questions, and observe the candidate in how they respond. It should be a more conversational tone the entire time, random discussion paths pursued, especially if the candidate's interests perk up about something. Every candidate has a different background so getting them to talk about that and problems they solved and diving into those in detail should be a good gauge of ability.
A friend of mine - against my loud objections - hired some Pakistani offshore group to build an app for him around 2015 or so. $15k "estimate" but it was all time & materials not flat rate. They had an "office" with a "CEO" in NYC but no staff, just a PO Box. The whole thing was super fishy and I said as much but he didn't care because they were cheap.
Fast forward nearly 18 months into the 6 month contract, and about $40k later, there is no working app and the "CEO" says "well I would love to give you some of your money back but the contract has expired so I am no longer able to do that, we could sign another one for $20k to finish if you'd like."
I've worked with probably a dozen offshoring companies in my life in one way or another and every single one of them has been deceitful to the point of being fraudulent, and puts out some of the worst code you have ever seen.
I tell everyone considering it that if you can afford it, you're getting scammed in one way or another. You're better off going with a US-based firm that guarantees you'll get American workers who are physically in the US working on your product.
I'd rather hire Deloitte or Accenture for 10x the price - I know they offshore a ton but you'll at least have avenues to get your money back if they don't deliver.
Fast forward nearly 18 months into the 6 month contract, and about $40k later, there is no working app and the "CEO" says "well I would love to give you some of your money back but the contract has expired so I am no longer able to do that, we could sign another one for $20k to finish if you'd like."
I've worked with probably a dozen offshoring companies in my life in one way or another and every single one of them has been deceitful to the point of being fraudulent, and puts out some of the worst code you have ever seen.
I tell everyone considering it that if you can afford it, you're getting scammed in one way or another. You're better off going with a US-based firm that guarantees you'll get American workers who are physically in the US working on your product.
I'd rather hire Deloitte or Accenture for 10x the price - I know they offshore a ton but you'll at least have avenues to get your money back if they don't deliver.
Well, speaking anecdotally, I personally know some rather excellent East Euro mobile devs who could probably build anything (within reason) for $60k-$80k a year, and do it rather well. (Not advertising anyone's services, just mentioning the rates good devs work for around here).
They exist for sure. They are not working for the out sources because they have found someone willing to pay them what they are really worth - this might be a lot less than they could make in the US, but a lot more than they can make from the cheap outsourceers. You can find great offshore labor, but you need to hire someone who knows the country to manage those people as not everyone is great. You also need to be willing to pay the great people.
Reminds me of one of my favorite stories on reddit:
https://www.reddit.com/r/ProgrammerHumor/comments/2xjrdy/whe...
tl;dr - Company CTO hires off-shore dev consultant to write an app, the code is horrendously bad, doesn't even fulfill requirements, and has to be thrown out because it's such a bug-ridden mess. Company scrambles to produce the app internally and succeeds. Later, they need to launch a new product, CTO decides to rehire the same off-shore consultant.
https://www.reddit.com/r/ProgrammerHumor/comments/2xjrdy/whe...
tl;dr - Company CTO hires off-shore dev consultant to write an app, the code is horrendously bad, doesn't even fulfill requirements, and has to be thrown out because it's such a bug-ridden mess. Company scrambles to produce the app internally and succeeds. Later, they need to launch a new product, CTO decides to rehire the same off-shore consultant.
Honestly at the CTO level even making that first hire is borderline fireable depending on how bad it was.
Second time is very quickly approaching "what salary/bonus/options/401k match can we claw back because this is professional negligence" territory.
Second time is very quickly approaching "what salary/bonus/options/401k match can we claw back because this is professional negligence" territory.
Almost none of the types of companies you are referring to use US staff for the grunt work. They may have sales, management and leads in the US. But even the major firms like Deloitte and Accenture use off shore labor for the most part.
You’re not going to want to pay the rates that they will charge for their best of the best hands on developers based in the US and if they did start staffing lots of devs in the US, they wouldn’t be price competitive.
I have worked at AWS Professional Service (full time direct hire) and now work at a third party consulting company as a “staff consultant”. Only a few large and/or well funded companies (and government agencies pre-DOGE) were/are willing to pay the rates that the companies charge to have me on a project.
Even then, they lean on me far more for leadership and strategy than hands on keyboard
You’re not going to want to pay the rates that they will charge for their best of the best hands on developers based in the US and if they did start staffing lots of devs in the US, they wouldn’t be price competitive.
I have worked at AWS Professional Service (full time direct hire) and now work at a third party consulting company as a “staff consultant”. Only a few large and/or well funded companies (and government agencies pre-DOGE) were/are willing to pay the rates that the companies charge to have me on a project.
Even then, they lean on me far more for leadership and strategy than hands on keyboard
<cough>Thoughtworks</cough>
Expand on the a little please. I’d like to know the background.
[Apologies: I mistook the context with my original reply and just realized that]
GP suggested Deloitte and Accenture. They do offer technical consulting services but really as an afterthought specializing in accounting and business consulting. Thoughtworks (home to Martin Fowler, Kent Beck, Zhamak Dehghani and so many more) is far more savvy, had been a far better presence in the industry, and has more highly skilled people. I am a bit partial but with reason.
GP suggested Deloitte and Accenture. They do offer technical consulting services but really as an afterthought specializing in accounting and business consulting. Thoughtworks (home to Martin Fowler, Kent Beck, Zhamak Dehghani and so many more) is far more savvy, had been a far better presence in the industry, and has more highly skilled people. I am a bit partial but with reason.
Oh okay. I thought you had something negative to say about thoughtworks. I’ve known a few people who worked there and thought there was some messy business i didn’t know about.
TL;DR: I recommend it as a workplace and service provider.
In balance, I have absolutely nothing negative to say; I loved working there and felt great about the work we did for others. Consultancies and their clients can be messy but it was a wonderful place to overwork (relative to my personal capacities). The technologists were top notch, people cared to do good work and deliver real business value, and the ambient emotional intelligence was soothingly glorious.
In balance, I have absolutely nothing negative to say; I loved working there and felt great about the work we did for others. Consultancies and their clients can be messy but it was a wonderful place to overwork (relative to my personal capacities). The technologists were top notch, people cared to do good work and deliver real business value, and the ambient emotional intelligence was soothingly glorious.
so savvy that they coined the term "Dependency Injection" as some magical software architectural pattern...
Your semi-regular reminder that Fowler and Beck were part of the brain trust involved with the gigantic disaster that was the "Chrysler Comprehensive Compensation System".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrysler_Comprehensive_Compens...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrysler_Comprehensive_Compens...
[deleted]
Right because Deloitte and Accenture engagements have no history of running wildly over projections on time or budget. They don't do $15k app projects anyway.
> It should be a more conversational tone the entire time, random discussion paths pursued, especially if the candidate's interests perk up about something.
Will we get AI to determine if the candidates are using AI?
Will we get AI to determine if the candidates are using AI?
> putting recruit A in front of the interviewer and then slotting recruit B in after the position is secured
reality is way more messy and worse. There are multiple actors involved in each part. Eg 2-3 "actors" for visual screen are ready for each call, 2-4 "audio" knowledge only experts on the call, 1 dedicated speaker, 1 person coordinating answers from audio folks to actor folks.
they are even ready for once in a while visit to offices in us, so they have actors there on the field as well ready to attend calls (probably 1 to 1 mapping after first visit)
and the work assigned is assigned to a completely different set of people, not involved in any of above. those folks and these folks dont interact.
i have worked part time as one of the "audio" person in above interviews. also involved on work side. ama.
reality is way more messy and worse. There are multiple actors involved in each part. Eg 2-3 "actors" for visual screen are ready for each call, 2-4 "audio" knowledge only experts on the call, 1 dedicated speaker, 1 person coordinating answers from audio folks to actor folks.
they are even ready for once in a while visit to offices in us, so they have actors there on the field as well ready to attend calls (probably 1 to 1 mapping after first visit)
and the work assigned is assigned to a completely different set of people, not involved in any of above. those folks and these folks dont interact.
i have worked part time as one of the "audio" person in above interviews. also involved on work side. ama.
This sounds nuts, do you have any sources for this?
i am the source, i have worked across multiple years on and off between 2015-2020
The effort of the grift doesn't seem to match the score, or at least I think that's what the other guy is saying. Are they doing this for the philosophical challenge of it?
No this is not for philosophical challenge. not one of these actors are "enjoying" their work. its a regular job at the end.
Compare US tier 1 city salary to India tier 2 city salary and the math will work out.
Compare US tier 1 city salary to India tier 2 city salary and the math will work out.
… what’s the point?
It is because you give someone who can do work, access to the client - they will instantly forget that they "came from collectivist culture" and flip out to work directly. So those who can work, don't get access to client. Those who get access to client, can't work.
money is made, people are living on this. surely better than call center scams ? because work is being delivered. work from fortune 500 companies end up here.
"because work is being delivered"
This is debatable.
My company now mandates all contractors sourced via one specific firm, and more recently that 70% of contractors are located "offshore", which in practice means India. Of the 5 contractors they have placed, I've let 4 go for performance reasons. Even at the rates they're getting paid (about 25% what a domestic resource would get) they're net-negative value.
This is debatable.
My company now mandates all contractors sourced via one specific firm, and more recently that 70% of contractors are located "offshore", which in practice means India. Of the 5 contractors they have placed, I've let 4 go for performance reasons. Even at the rates they're getting paid (about 25% what a domestic resource would get) they're net-negative value.
redhat openshift is partly developed by this work. I know its not great. the "engineers" working there are afraid to touch the code even beyond whats asked of them.
> This is debatable
work is being delivered is relative, not talking about good work or great work. its average at best. The debate you want to do maybe is if this is better than call center scams
> This is debatable
work is being delivered is relative, not talking about good work or great work. its average at best. The debate you want to do maybe is if this is better than call center scams
There are great developers in India, but they get a lot more than 25% of US salaries. Great developers in Germany are cheaper than India - but labor rules in Germany are weird.
Make money ?
I'm having trouble understanding how 1 company paying 1 salary for 1 position makes money for the 8-12 people described in the process above.
One Western salary can be enough to pay for a whole boiler room's worth of salaries in a third-world country.
1 company, taking up multiple positions (5-10) in multiple companies (3-5) as regular full time employees (us salary) and work is spread across lowly paid workers. and its not 8-12 people involved, that would be just 1 position. there would be about 20-50 people in these "smbs"
because the people above are just for the interview.. And they are shared across multiple jobs, so it is not just 1 position..
They apply to multiple jobs at multiple companies..
One team handle interview process to make sure they get the job, once they get the job another set of people handle the actual work.. And then the interview team also handle any instance the person need to be seen or talked to..
Each job pay a few of those guys and the company keep the rest.. If they land enough jobs they can easily pay for all that..
They apply to multiple jobs at multiple companies..
One team handle interview process to make sure they get the job, once they get the job another set of people handle the actual work.. And then the interview team also handle any instance the person need to be seen or talked to..
Each job pay a few of those guys and the company keep the rest.. If they land enough jobs they can easily pay for all that..
Those people are only for the initial interview.
Also, the purchasing power disparity in different regions is humongous. For what a typical L5 might get paid in Silicon Valley, you can afford a team of 5-10 in India, and India isn’t even ‘low cost’ anymore.
Also, the purchasing power disparity in different regions is humongous. For what a typical L5 might get paid in Silicon Valley, you can afford a team of 5-10 in India, and India isn’t even ‘low cost’ anymore.
You clearly do not understand how rich Americans are. $10k USD is massive amounts of money in these enabling countries
[deleted]
You assume they care about the people and underestimate the desperation of those employees. This is slave labor and it's what US developers are up against. This is why under Trump we've seen 100k layoffs in Tech this year.
yes, its a regular freelancer project to begin with for all these actors
I had 4 instances where a sketchy Asian guy showed up to an interview. Something was always off. Twice it was the same guy under two different names. In the final case I called the candidate out that the they are from North Korea. They were frazzled and when they began talking the connection dropped mid-word.
It’s as if someone else disconnected us.
I am sure they are North Koreans. Next time I will have a picture of fat leader printed out and I am asking the candidate what they think of Kim.
It’s as if someone else disconnected us.
I am sure they are North Koreans. Next time I will have a picture of fat leader printed out and I am asking the candidate what they think of Kim.
We're hiring for a software engineer right now. The amount of time our single HR professional has had to invest in sorting through scam candidates is ungodly. We had someone apply to the job three times, using different names and resumes each time. We've had two candidates who we suspected were responding to questioning with an AI tool that was listening to the interviewer's voice (poorly, which might be the only reason why we caught them). We had one candidate who said they were on the east coast, but upon further investigation, the person didn't exist; and following a hunch, upon casually bringing up that it seemed pretty dark where they were at, they disconnected from the call and we never heard from them again.
If you think these scams aren't real, you aren't looking. We're a remote company, but our policy is now to only hire candidates from internal referrals, or candidates who are in a location where someone on the team they're hiring into can grab coffee with them.
If you think these scams aren't real, you aren't looking. We're a remote company, but our policy is now to only hire candidates from internal referrals, or candidates who are in a location where someone on the team they're hiring into can grab coffee with them.
Asking a candidate to do an outdoor interview at a public park so you can cross reference the sky with their time of day and weather and google maps photos sounds interesting.
Mind posting the position? I'm a real person! Would love to apply!
> Many of these agencies are from collectivist cultures, so in the mind of the agency, they all work in our project. This may not be true, but the agency sees the position as theirs, not the recruit's. So they typically don't the issue with putting recruit A in front of the interviewer and then slotting recruit B in after the position is secured.
Guess France is a collectivist culture. That's 101 of many consultancies: get the contract by presenting the A-Team then switch with junior employees a couple weeks in.
Guess France is a collectivist culture. That's 101 of many consultancies: get the contract by presenting the A-Team then switch with junior employees a couple weeks in.
There is a difference between engaging with a consultancy and hiring for a position. They know that too, or the lip syncing mentioned wouldn’t be a thing.
There's a simple solution to people cheating in interviews.
In-person interviews.
And if you don't want to pay for that, proctoring.
And if you don't want to pay for that, I have next to zero sympathy for you.
In-person interviews.
And if you don't want to pay for that, proctoring.
And if you don't want to pay for that, I have next to zero sympathy for you.
> Typically the scam is that an offshore consultancy wants to place some roles to collect wages. Many of these agencies are from collectivist cultures, so in the mind of the agency, they all work in our project. This may not be true, but the agency sees the position as theirs, not the recruit's. So they typically don't the issue with putting recruit A in front of the interviewer and then slotting recruit B in after the position is secured.
I've run into this with a Ukrainian consultancy. It wasn't even a scam. They told us up-front that they were prepared to pull their best engineers from some other clients and put them on our team in order to win our business. Our obvious reaction: and when you get another opportunity, you will pull those engineers from us and we'll get the B-team, just like you're about to do to someone else.
Naturally we didn't move forward with them (this was before the war, so very lucky decision)
I've run into this with a Ukrainian consultancy. It wasn't even a scam. They told us up-front that they were prepared to pull their best engineers from some other clients and put them on our team in order to win our business. Our obvious reaction: and when you get another opportunity, you will pull those engineers from us and we'll get the B-team, just like you're about to do to someone else.
Naturally we didn't move forward with them (this was before the war, so very lucky decision)
They are not a fiction. I’m dealing with LLM generated resumes right now. I just one that wasn’t too smart, and it claimed to have led a project for our company despite never having worked there.
>The best candidates I've fielded have been Ukrainian, Russian and Chinese. These are countries well known for their tech sectors.
Out of curiosity, what tech sector does Ukraine have? I don't remember ever hearing of any large successful Ukrainian SW compony or unicorn.
Out of curiosity, what tech sector does Ukraine have? I don't remember ever hearing of any large successful Ukrainian SW compony or unicorn.
Spark / Readdle. Not a unicorn, but I've been a happy user for years.
(Their response to a customer-service request a year or so ago was sobering. Along the lines of "yes, that's a bug we know about, but the developer who owns that feature lost his home in a missile strike last week. Once he's got housing and a new laptop he'll fix it." A week later he fixed it.)
(Their response to a customer-service request a year or so ago was sobering. Along the lines of "yes, that's a bug we know about, but the developer who owns that feature lost his home in a missile strike last week. Once he's got housing and a new laptop he'll fix it." A week later he fixed it.)
Guess what happens with any promising European startup (including Eastern European ones). It's acquired by American companies.
Europe doesn't have a ton of large and high paying software companies, but it does have a ton of good developers.
Romania probably has produced half a million software developers over the past 30 years (in a population of about 20 million), yet it basically doesn't have any large software companies. Probably the biggest you might have heard of are Bitdefender or in the past Softpedia.
Or the alternative, foreign companies set up shop there to scoop up the local developers. Using Romania as an example, Bucharest has R&D centers with at least hundreds of developers each (some with thousands), for: Amazon, Google, Microsoft, Oracle, Adobe, SAP, UIPath, Huawei, Honeywell, IBM, Cognizant, Ericsson, Ubisoft, HP, etc.
Europe doesn't have a ton of large and high paying software companies, but it does have a ton of good developers.
Romania probably has produced half a million software developers over the past 30 years (in a population of about 20 million), yet it basically doesn't have any large software companies. Probably the biggest you might have heard of are Bitdefender or in the past Softpedia.
Or the alternative, foreign companies set up shop there to scoop up the local developers. Using Romania as an example, Bucharest has R&D centers with at least hundreds of developers each (some with thousands), for: Amazon, Google, Microsoft, Oracle, Adobe, SAP, UIPath, Huawei, Honeywell, IBM, Cognizant, Ericsson, Ubisoft, HP, etc.
I’ve started paying more attention and noticing a lot of the creators/maintainers of open source libraries are located in Eastern Europe.
I've always had the impression that Ukraine's tech sector is primarily focused on outsourcing or outstaffing for Western companies, so they typically don't own what they build (and it's very custom, boring enterprise stuff anyway).
Russia, on the other hand, has traditionally focused more on building its own products and brands, both for its domestic market (Yandex, VK) and the global market (Karsperky, ABBYY, JetBrains). When a technology they create for themselves turns out to be pretty good, it often spills over to the West and gains global popularity - examples being ClickHouse (originally to support metrics collection at Yandex), nginx (originally a reverse proxy at Rambler), etc. I have a hard time remembering something similar coming out of Ukraine?..
I may be wrong, it's just my impression of it (reading Ukrainian/Russian job postings etc.)
Russia, on the other hand, has traditionally focused more on building its own products and brands, both for its domestic market (Yandex, VK) and the global market (Karsperky, ABBYY, JetBrains). When a technology they create for themselves turns out to be pretty good, it often spills over to the West and gains global popularity - examples being ClickHouse (originally to support metrics collection at Yandex), nginx (originally a reverse proxy at Rambler), etc. I have a hard time remembering something similar coming out of Ukraine?..
I may be wrong, it's just my impression of it (reading Ukrainian/Russian job postings etc.)
TeamDev, quite popular amongst large businesses with Chromium-based widgets for Java and .NET.
JxBrowser: https://teamdev.com/jxbrowser/ DotNetBrowser: https://teamdev.com/dotnetbrowser/
JxBrowser: https://teamdev.com/jxbrowser/ DotNetBrowser: https://teamdev.com/dotnetbrowser/
parts of remote Eastern Europe have produced excellent techs for decades.. they seem to deny it now but JetBrainz is from there, which is hugely successful.
> JetBrainz
Its Jetbrains, and they don't deny having workers there at all (the company itself If I recall correctly is located in the Czech Republic). In fact, they went through great expense to exfiltrate their Ukrainian employees and cut Russia off before everyone else got on the bandwagon (IE, before it was 'cool').
Its Jetbrains, and they don't deny having workers there at all (the company itself If I recall correctly is located in the Czech Republic). In fact, they went through great expense to exfiltrate their Ukrainian employees and cut Russia off before everyone else got on the bandwagon (IE, before it was 'cool').
Russia has been sanctioned since 2014 and that's when the tech exodus began.
I always thought that Jetbrains is 100% Russian? Why would foreigners choose "Kotlin" for the name of programming language?
IIRC JetBrains was nominally registered in Czech Republic but the majority of the engineers were located in St.Petersburg (and Kotlin is an island near St.Petersburg).
[deleted]
>parts of remote Eastern Europe have produced excellent techs for decades..
Like wich exactly? Jetbrains is one, but it is from Czechia IIRC. I was asking what tech products has Ukrainian tech sector produced.
Like wich exactly? Jetbrains is one, but it is from Czechia IIRC. I was asking what tech products has Ukrainian tech sector produced.
Jetbrains is Russian. They relocated to Czech to wash their face.
I honestly do not know about this -- wasn't it based in Kiev at first?
According to Wikipedia “ JetBrains, initially called IntelliJ Software,[9][10] was founded in 2000 in Prague by three Russian software developers:”
My understanding is that they had the Czech business location with Russian developers so they had a clean public face.
I’d believe you if you insisted on Kiev based too, I don’t know anything first hand.
My understanding is that they had the Czech business location with Russian developers so they had a clean public face.
I’d believe you if you insisted on Kiev based too, I don’t know anything first hand.
[deleted]
I've worked with several excellent Ukrainian developers, but in each case they were working for consulting firms in other Eastern European countries.
> have produced excellent tech <<talent>> for decades..
There you go, hope it makes more sense for you.
There you go, hope it makes more sense for you.
Understandable, thanks.
Leonid Radvinsky, Ruja Ignatova ?
What part of "tech products of Ukraine" was unclear?
An Israeli and a Bulgarian gypsy?
Have you heard of grammarly? Or gitlab?
Grammarly?
While I agree that this narrative is fodder for RTO-hungry CEOs... it is something that happens albeit typically in a different way. You'll have someone do the interview on behalf of another candidate.
A deepfaked recruit is a slight extension of that.
A deepfaked recruit is a slight extension of that.
Yes, AI is used a pretext for many things. RTO, cost cutting, you name it. But since the fact remains though that there are fake recruits for remote positions, if you strip out the AI rhetoric, it remains a legitimate argument in favor of RTO.
It’s a legitimate argument to fly the person in for interviews.
I got my only remote BigTech job post Covid where the entire loop was remote. But it was customary before then to fly people into the office for the final interview.
Yes I realize “remote first” companies may not have an office. But even then, you could fly the interviewees to the location of the interviewer and use a hotel conference room.
I got my only remote BigTech job post Covid where the entire loop was remote. But it was customary before then to fly people into the office for the final interview.
Yes I realize “remote first” companies may not have an office. But even then, you could fly the interviewees to the location of the interviewer and use a hotel conference room.
Agreed but I suppose the problem then is you could have an interviewer hand off his or her duties to a third party. In theory, regular presence in an office is a mitigation against this.
I’m not using this citation as a counterpoint to your comment and I realize this is a degenerate case. But it has happened in office…
https://www.cnn.com/2013/01/17/business/us-outsource-job-chi...
And as much as I hate to admit it, remote work has so many downsides for most companies, I see why many of them are in on RTO and hybrid.
Luckily in 2020 I pivoted to cloud consulting + app dev where it doesn’t make sense to be in the office since you will either be working with clients remotely or flying into their offices.
And even then AWS forced their ProServe consultants and SAs (full time employees) to be in an office when not on the client’s sites after I had already left. As does GCP.
https://www.cnn.com/2013/01/17/business/us-outsource-job-chi...
And as much as I hate to admit it, remote work has so many downsides for most companies, I see why many of them are in on RTO and hybrid.
Luckily in 2020 I pivoted to cloud consulting + app dev where it doesn’t make sense to be in the office since you will either be working with clients remotely or flying into their offices.
And even then AWS forced their ProServe consultants and SAs (full time employees) to be in an office when not on the client’s sites after I had already left. As does GCP.
I refuse to believe a country as isolated as NK is pumping out genius hackers better than any other country. They speak one of the few languages isolates in the world. They don’t attract high-quality foreigners, if any at all. They don’t get access to the larger scientific community. Their universities don’t allow extended discourse for local students with the few foreigners they allow. Their internet infrastructure is pathetic and their citizens are poor.
Call me a conspiracy theorist but it seems vastly more likely that China and Russia (far and away NK’s strongest, nearest, and largest allies) are executing these hacks and blaming them on the NKs to avoid retribution.
You either believe that or that NKs are genetically superior specimens because they’re not doing anything else that would yield the superior results they attain.
Call me a conspiracy theorist but it seems vastly more likely that China and Russia (far and away NK’s strongest, nearest, and largest allies) are executing these hacks and blaming them on the NKs to avoid retribution.
You either believe that or that NKs are genetically superior specimens because they’re not doing anything else that would yield the superior results they attain.
Just speculating. I would also guess maybe Russian and Chinese candidates have more domestic opportunities or the NK government sponsors more activity like this.
The title alone reeks of pro-RTO-at-all-costs "there's nothing wrong with driving an hour each way to your office because work should be the most important thing in your life here's $70k for the year thanks so much" bullshit.
I'm 100% sure there are some people there using AI to try to get through interviews, but what's the end game? The article mentions faking identification documents and work history. Well the first is a crime, and the second takes about 5 minutes to verify. "RTO to prevent crime" is so dumb even the RTO CEOs aren't pushing that one yet.
I'm 100% sure there are some people there using AI to try to get through interviews, but what's the end game? The article mentions faking identification documents and work history. Well the first is a crime, and the second takes about 5 minutes to verify. "RTO to prevent crime" is so dumb even the RTO CEOs aren't pushing that one yet.
Ha, yes, agree. How many trips to the office should it take to prove you are real meat?
I also see this as spreading FUD. I have led quite many remote interviews recently with European candidates and I can guarantee that not one of them was an AI generated pretender. Also, since LLMs is a popular topic nowadays, it was easy to have candid conversations about their use. I have also seen recorded videos of these AI-generated candidates and with two brain cells working it's easy to identify them. It's also easy to see and feel if a candidate is having a genuine conversation with you or is trying to use AI-assistant tools.
Maybe in the future it will be a more significant problem but not this year, not next year and probably not even this decade.
Maybe in the future it will be a more significant problem but not this year, not next year and probably not even this decade.
> When voice authentication startup Pindrop Security posted a recent job opening, one candidate stood out from hundreds of others.
> The applicant, a Russian coder named Ivan, seemed to have all the right qualifications for the senior engineering role. When he was interviewed over video last month, however, Pindrop’s recruiter noticed that Ivan’s facial expressions were slightly out of sync with his words.
> That’s because the candidate, whom the firm has since dubbed “Ivan X,” was a scammer using deepfake software and other generative AI tools in a bid to get hired by the tech company, said Pindrop CEO and co-founder Vijay Balasubramaniyan.
Hm, let's read on.
> As for “Ivan X,” Pindrop’s Balasubramaniyan said the startup used a new video authentication program it created to confirm he was a deepfake fraud.
Oh, I get it, it's an ad for Pindrop.
> The applicant, a Russian coder named Ivan, seemed to have all the right qualifications for the senior engineering role. When he was interviewed over video last month, however, Pindrop’s recruiter noticed that Ivan’s facial expressions were slightly out of sync with his words.
> That’s because the candidate, whom the firm has since dubbed “Ivan X,” was a scammer using deepfake software and other generative AI tools in a bid to get hired by the tech company, said Pindrop CEO and co-founder Vijay Balasubramaniyan.
Hm, let's read on.
> As for “Ivan X,” Pindrop’s Balasubramaniyan said the startup used a new video authentication program it created to confirm he was a deepfake fraud.
Oh, I get it, it's an ad for Pindrop.
Anyone wanna put a bet down if Pindrop is using AI to detect AI? Now we can burn one rainforest down to generate deepfake content and burn another rainforest down to detect it and filter it so we don't need to look at it.
Christ the future is stupid.
Christ the future is stupid.
The future will have two Dyson spheres in competition at every job interview.
[deleted]
Sup dawg I heard you like AI.
Got it! However, as a large language model I am unable to feel emotions about AI or other topics.
Just as Pindrop's CEO says "Ivan X" is a scammer, the whole incident can be a cooked up situation to drump up Pindrop, or a set up Pindrop created just to sell their product.
Another remote employment fraud that is much more prevalent is "Overemployment". You will get an applicant that is very skilled and hits the interview out of the park. But then when hired they are working many jobs and just trying to steal as many paychecks as they can until you fire them. They keep their first jobs resume clean and they all check out.
There is a Reddit community with over 400k members to show how prevalent this is [1]. There's lots of tactics like not allowing mentions on LinkedIn so they can't be publicly mentioned and seen by other unsuspecting employers, and just maintaining plausible deniability about why they can't make an on camera meeting. It is technically not illegal so it is very lucrative and hard to detect.
https://www.reddit.com/r/overemployed/top/
There is a Reddit community with over 400k members to show how prevalent this is [1]. There's lots of tactics like not allowing mentions on LinkedIn so they can't be publicly mentioned and seen by other unsuspecting employers, and just maintaining plausible deniability about why they can't make an on camera meeting. It is technically not illegal so it is very lucrative and hard to detect.
https://www.reddit.com/r/overemployed/top/
Funny how you can be a CEO of 4 companies and nobody bats an eye. You can be a retail worker holding down 3 minimum wage jobs to make ends meet and they say you are a hard worker, busting your ass for your family. But if you’re a white collar knowledge worker juggling two jobs, and still meeting both jobs’ expected performance goals, they call you a fraud and a thief and if you are open about it, they will fire you.
It is a LOT different to be working multiple jobs at different times of the day. This is not what this is. This is trying to get away with working 2 or more jobs at the same time and making up excuses about why you can't make an on camera meeting. Also in the case of CEOs it is known they are doing that. If someone said yeah I have another job I will be working the same hours as your job that is totally fair. But they don't say that. They say their pipes froze, doctor's appointment, etc. It is also fair that the worker can do what they would like in their time including working another job. I have also had people who honestly said they were wrapping up their consulting gig and would need some time periodically to take off and that was fine too.
> If someone said yeah I have another job I will be working the same hours as your job that is totally fair.
Close to zero companies would accept this, even if your performance met standards and you did it in such a way you didn't miss a single meeting. That's why I said if you are open about it they will fire [or not hire] you. It's a double standard.
Close to zero companies would accept this, even if your performance met standards and you did it in such a way you didn't miss a single meeting. That's why I said if you are open about it they will fire [or not hire] you. It's a double standard.
This is because companies are stupid and lazy when it comes to measuring performance.
There is only one used method of performance measurement: time spent. Every company who CLAIMS to be "data-driven" or "gamifies the system" are lying through their teeth. They're like every other company, they measure performance by hours spent.
I've seen many engineers easily hitting double the number of tickets closed as others. They don't work 20 hours a week. If they did, they would be fired within days.
This is why over-employment is "cheating". Employers don't actually care about your performance, they care about how much you're paying. If you're paying less to them, even if their end of the deal is sweet, they feel cheated. They, like most Americans, value perceived fairness over actual outcomes. They have no issue shooting themselves, or you, in the foot if this looks to be more fair.
There is only one used method of performance measurement: time spent. Every company who CLAIMS to be "data-driven" or "gamifies the system" are lying through their teeth. They're like every other company, they measure performance by hours spent.
I've seen many engineers easily hitting double the number of tickets closed as others. They don't work 20 hours a week. If they did, they would be fired within days.
This is why over-employment is "cheating". Employers don't actually care about your performance, they care about how much you're paying. If you're paying less to them, even if their end of the deal is sweet, they feel cheated. They, like most Americans, value perceived fairness over actual outcomes. They have no issue shooting themselves, or you, in the foot if this looks to be more fair.
I could work two different retail jobs in a day if the schedules work out. I cannot work 40 hours a week as an engineer, much less take on a second job (fortunately I can always find a few mindless meetings to make up my job). So long as I'm expected to work 40 hour weeks my company is justified in asking me not work a second job in my field as I couldn't anyway.
Now I could go out and get a retail job for after my regular job.
Now I could go out and get a retail job for after my regular job.
yeah, if you're salaried big corps expect to own you. you generally sign away all your creative rights to side projects when you take the offer, and you usually agree not to take other jobs, too.
You're basically describing every fractional CTO I've ever met.
1. If you're upfront with it, and everyone involved has signed off on it, it isn't ethically wrong. Its not the overemployment that's the problem; its the deceit. I've seen this happen multiple times, including once myself. Communicate, set boundaries, be a professional. It isn't common to be fired for asking if working a second job is within the bounds of your first job's employment. On the other hand, if you're already working the second job, and you inform them about it; that's deceit.
2. I'm not aware of anyone who is the CEO of 4 companies; well, except Mr Musk, but don't you dare say for a second that no one is batting an eye at that. Most CEOs I know barely have enough time for one company; and obviously the performance of Musk's companies recently suggests he's in the same boat.
3. The original poster pretty clearly inferred that, in these situations, generally speaking these workers are not meeting performance expectations.
2. I'm not aware of anyone who is the CEO of 4 companies; well, except Mr Musk, but don't you dare say for a second that no one is batting an eye at that. Most CEOs I know barely have enough time for one company; and obviously the performance of Musk's companies recently suggests he's in the same boat.
3. The original poster pretty clearly inferred that, in these situations, generally speaking these workers are not meeting performance expectations.
Is the CEO working at 4 companies in a transparent manner, approved by the boards of their companies? Then I don't see any problem.
If you want to work at 4 companies and your 4 managers don't have a problem with it, then go for it. Real problem arises when one lie about it and does it stealthily. Lying shouldn't be allowed, neither for CEOs nor for worker bees.
If you want to work at 4 companies and your 4 managers don't have a problem with it, then go for it. Real problem arises when one lie about it and does it stealthily. Lying shouldn't be allowed, neither for CEOs nor for worker bees.
Yeah, this feels like fraud in the case of lying to literally get extra paychecks knowing you don't care if you get fired. I wonder what these people will do when their original employer lays them off, and now their job search becomes harder since they've burned so many bridges.
I have approximately zero sympathy for companies in this situation. They've done everything possible to quash worker's rights, collude on wages, and commit billions in wage theft against the very poorest of workers.
As they say, "Turnabout is fair play".
As they say, "Turnabout is fair play".
I am of the same opinion. Employers get to jerk employees around. Look at union busting, look at how they fight tooth and nail against any pro labor regulation. Arguably unjustified mass layoffs. The tech salary suppression case and there are so many other examples that simply aren't jumping to my head right now.
But god forbid the laborers do anything that takes advantage of a situation to better their lot in life.
For the record, I ain't one of those folks either. I'm not looking to hold more than one job at a time, and I suspect the actual majority of workers are like this too, so even if the argument held water for someone, 400K people is less than 0.1% of the workforce. That is hardly worth worrying about beyond simple precautions if it something you think is an issue
But god forbid the laborers do anything that takes advantage of a situation to better their lot in life.
For the record, I ain't one of those folks either. I'm not looking to hold more than one job at a time, and I suspect the actual majority of workers are like this too, so even if the argument held water for someone, 400K people is less than 0.1% of the workforce. That is hardly worth worrying about beyond simple precautions if it something you think is an issue
I don’t agree - working remotely is (in most respects) beneficial to the employee, and requires a lot of trust from the employer. So I think employees should do their part and honor that trust by being at least as productive as they would be at an office.
(I work remotely for a big corp and this is how I feel and act as well.)
(I work remotely for a big corp and this is how I feel and act as well.)
I’d love to be as productive as in office. Because my productivity at home is ten times better. Nobody distracts me all the time.
Combating fraud with more fraud does not lead to a good place.
... if you don't want to reward any companies for being good actors, then yeah sure treat them all the same. Don't be a child.
This is the same as grouping all workers together as being lazy.
This is the same as grouping all workers together as being lazy.
You should have some sympathy for the person who got robbed out of a job because someone else just wanted to make even more money. Companies aren't the main victims of the overemployed.
You're not entitled to a job. If someone else is working two, nobody's 'robbing' you.
If you think you are, I'll counterpoint it by insisting that I'm entitled to a house. Why should someone else have two, or more, or two hundred, when I don't even have one? Some landlord hoarding of them is, after all, robbing me.
If you think you are, I'll counterpoint it by insisting that I'm entitled to a house. Why should someone else have two, or more, or two hundred, when I don't even have one? Some landlord hoarding of them is, after all, robbing me.
People are actually entitled to fair access to food, water and shelter. And yes, landlords (both individual and corporate) are robbing people of the opportunity to own property and establish long term communities
I'm entitled to a house. Why should someone else have two, or more, or two hundred, when I don't even have one? Some landlord hoarding of them is, after all, robbing me.
You are entitled to a place to live, and the option of choosing it to specifically be a somewhat normal house in your general area, and landlords actually are robbing a huge portion of the population from their right to own a home. The average age of a first time home owner is rising and it's not rising consensually. The US has been tilting away from the rational middle ground between "no landlords" and "landlords own everything" over the last few decades.
You are entitled to a place to live, and the option of choosing it to specifically be a somewhat normal house in your general area, and landlords actually are robbing a huge portion of the population from their right to own a home. The average age of a first time home owner is rising and it's not rising consensually. The US has been tilting away from the rational middle ground between "no landlords" and "landlords own everything" over the last few decades.
That's all fine and good until enough people are jobless and homeless and they come to take all our heads. And I wouldn't even blame 'em for it. If one side of the agreement won't uphold the social contract, it breaks down, and "survival of the fittest" is an ugly world most of us have never had to experience.
You can't be robbed of something you don't possess.
I don't really see the hyperbolic language about it. I've definitely worked some process-heavy corporate jobs where I could be perfectly satisfactorily productive as far as my management was concerned while only doing actual work like 20-30% of the time. Maybe I'm super smart or maybe they're just terrible at generating and assigning tasks, I don't know. Not my problem either way.
Especially in the WFH era where it's much easier to get away with it clean, I don't see anything all that wrong with working 2 or 3 such jobs at the same time. If all of them are happy, or at least not too terribly upset, with your performance, what's the harm. There's definitely been times in my life where I could see myself doing that just for the sake of being bored.
Especially in the WFH era where it's much easier to get away with it clean, I don't see anything all that wrong with working 2 or 3 such jobs at the same time. If all of them are happy, or at least not too terribly upset, with your performance, what's the harm. There's definitely been times in my life where I could see myself doing that just for the sake of being bored.
I'm doing exactly this, while working at a FAANG. My second and third jobs actually know I have a main FAANG job, and they have no problem with it. And I have no qualms about "stealing" from FAANG this way, sorry. In fact, my perf review at my main job is a mixture of "meets expectations", and "exceeds expectations".
@meindnoch,
What do you do in your second and third job? How did you find it?
What do you do in your second and third job? How did you find it?
My second job is consulting for my previous job which I've left to make more money at FAANG. My third job is consulting for a company where a friend of mine works. I gave him useful advice on some problems he was working on, and he connected me with the higher ups.
All three jobs are software engineering. C++ mostly.
All three jobs are software engineering. C++ mostly.
How many hours per week do jobs 2 and 3 consume?
Officially or actually?
I’d love to know both numbers, it’s an interesting story. I’m agree with you here, yet I think consulting is just different. You gain your expertise at job-1 (FAANG), and then you just use those skills at jobs 2 and 3. I think it’s not that simple, but I guess could be simplified that way.
Overemployment is just a symptom of the real problem: the company's performance management procedure is not adequate. It's no worse than someone merely slacking off or being incompetent and unable to do the job... and I bet there are many more of the latter than "overemployed" folks.
If it's not illegal then why are you using words like "fraud" and "steal"?
If you look at the history of fraud, people are always coming up with new ways to steal from people that are at the margins of legality. Consider the category "wire fraud", for example. It's not like some lawmakers looked at the nascent telephone and the telegraph and said, "Well boys, we'd better make sure these aren't used for crime." No, innovative scammers found ways to use the new technology for new crime for a few decades before the laws were updated. See Joesph "The Yellow Kid" Weil's autobiography for some examples.
Just because the fraud or theft isn't at the moment illegal doesn't meant it isn't fraud or theft.
Just because the fraud or theft isn't at the moment illegal doesn't meant it isn't fraud or theft.
> Just because the fraud or theft isn't at the moment illegal doesn't meant it isn't fraud or theft.
It's a breach of contract. It's not fraud or theft.
It's a breach of contract. It's not fraud or theft.
No. Fraud and theft are concepts that are broader than whatever legal jurisdiction you happen to be in at the time. Imagine that somebody gets one of those libertarian paradises up and going. Or imagine a failed state or a post-apocalyptic scenario, where there is no longer any law. It's still possible to run a fraud, it's just that the fraud would be, de jure or de facto, legal.
Because it is the technical definition of the words and that is exactly what it is. Something not being illegal does not mean that it isn't fraud or stealing. Misrepresenting your availability and willfully trying to cover that is is fraud. Taking someone's money while fraudulently not working for it is stealing. I know overemployment people will rationalize it some other way but it doesn't change that.
If those so "overemployed" (that is to say, working multiple jobs, a normal and common thing to do in society) were not working for their employer, they would be dismissed quickly.
Nobody's stealing anything in these situations.
Nobody's stealing anything in these situations.
I think you are conflating "working multiple jobs" with working multiple jobs during the same time period and lying to the other jobs about what you are doing when you cannot be reached. There is a big difference. If I work 9-5 on one job, and 5-1am on the other job that is not taking time from one to spend on the other. If I work 2+ jobs during that 9-5 period and not tell anyone and make excuses for not getting things done long enough until one of them fires me that is being dishonest.
I don't see the problem. How many CEO are also on the board of multiple companies? If people at the top can be employed by multiple companies, anyone with a job involving less responsibility doing the same should be ok.
Founder-CEO of three companies, on the board of another, "advisor" for another startup. On a non-profit board, too.
You notice that they have two "executive assistants" on staff at the 30-person company you're applying to. Gee, I wonder if this "CEO" does any actual work? No, of course they fucking don't. Linkedin post about how they balance work with family despite all this, LOL, it's because all your "jobs" are fake and you have enough money to pay to make all your personal work go away, too. You're a goddamn part-time worker dilettante playing pretend that you're a "hard worker" with amazing time management skills.
Yeah, demands that employees operate under far greater constraints and give more than the near-zero shits about the company than the owner- and executive-classes for way less compensation are totally reasonable and should be respected. /s
You notice that they have two "executive assistants" on staff at the 30-person company you're applying to. Gee, I wonder if this "CEO" does any actual work? No, of course they fucking don't. Linkedin post about how they balance work with family despite all this, LOL, it's because all your "jobs" are fake and you have enough money to pay to make all your personal work go away, too. You're a goddamn part-time worker dilettante playing pretend that you're a "hard worker" with amazing time management skills.
Yeah, demands that employees operate under far greater constraints and give more than the near-zero shits about the company than the owner- and executive-classes for way less compensation are totally reasonable and should be respected. /s
People with this belief have never tried hiring, training, and retaining 6 EAs.
Take as much as you can as fast as you can. You know the lovely, benevolent companies that are generously offering you a position will find any and every opportunity to cut as many people as fast as they can. It's been made pretty apparent at this point in the giant dumb game that the average worker is not worth much to a corporation.
And as others have pointed out, apparently it's only ok when a genius-level CEO takes four different CEO spots and a few board seats and continues to play video games all day. Yep, totally ok and not for anyone else.
And as others have pointed out, apparently it's only ok when a genius-level CEO takes four different CEO spots and a few board seats and continues to play video games all day. Yep, totally ok and not for anyone else.
> working many jobs
Somehow that's fine for higher ups to 'sit' on 10 boards. And they do not see that like 'steal as many paychecks'.
Somehow that's fine for higher ups to 'sit' on 10 boards. And they do not see that like 'steal as many paychecks'.
I'm always torn on this, on one hand there are companies that are so inept that they really only need people 4-10 hours per week, and they are happy with that.
On the other hand, I am the hiring manager at a healthcare company and I have to layoff 1-2 people per year who do this. I know all the tell tale signs, random blocks on calendar, missing meetings, sudden health issues when there are production incidents, getting stuck on simple problems for days at a time. Of course you can always back it up by looking at their stats (staring at Microsoft teams 4-5 hours a day).
On the other hand, I am the hiring manager at a healthcare company and I have to layoff 1-2 people per year who do this. I know all the tell tale signs, random blocks on calendar, missing meetings, sudden health issues when there are production incidents, getting stuck on simple problems for days at a time. Of course you can always back it up by looking at their stats (staring at Microsoft teams 4-5 hours a day).
The term I've heard is "moonlighting" but same concept. As someone that's seen really smart guys at my company get sacked over this, my takeaway is you can do it but you gotta be real good to not get caught and don't be surprised if you're fired. There was one guy we had to fire over this and he had no remorse and took is super well. I could tell for him he understood this was part of the gig and probably had higher paying jobs to fallback on.
> and took it super well
I just close that company’s laptop and never think about them again.
There is no linkedin to update, no resume to update, no desperate dash or networking for another role.
Although there is less sympathy for being sacked for performance issues when thats the reason, the realities in my overemployment journey have been companies running out of runway for reasons not solvable by engineering direction, furloughs, government contracts where the top performers only lasted 5 more weeks longer than I did after being promised that the project was a 5 year contract, whole org adjustments, “we are going in a different direction” and more. Tech is not a stable sector. This is a far superior position to be in.
I’ve met expectations and gotten raises from simultaneous full time roles as well.
I just close that company’s laptop and never think about them again.
There is no linkedin to update, no resume to update, no desperate dash or networking for another role.
Although there is less sympathy for being sacked for performance issues when thats the reason, the realities in my overemployment journey have been companies running out of runway for reasons not solvable by engineering direction, furloughs, government contracts where the top performers only lasted 5 more weeks longer than I did after being promised that the project was a 5 year contract, whole org adjustments, “we are going in a different direction” and more. Tech is not a stable sector. This is a far superior position to be in.
I’ve met expectations and gotten raises from simultaneous full time roles as well.
Moonlighting is working a second job at night (“by the light of the moon”). Overemployment is fraudulently charging two companies for the same hour of time.
Salaried positions don’t pay by the hour but by meeting benchmarks, job accountabilities, etc. so I’m not sure “fraudulently” belongs in that sentence.
I concur. The only reason it doesn't feel this way is because companies have been abusing the spirit and intent of salary for a long time. They effectively make it about time, and then don't pay overtime because they're exempt. Salary is basically just hourly but with a sweeter deal for the employer.
So, from the employer's perspective, it feels like fraud. But they've effectively been defrauding you for the past 100 years, by making you work salary when your job isn't a salary job. So, it's even. Well... not really. Still absurdly skewed in the employer's favor of course, but a little more even.
So, from the employer's perspective, it feels like fraud. But they've effectively been defrauding you for the past 100 years, by making you work salary when your job isn't a salary job. So, it's even. Well... not really. Still absurdly skewed in the employer's favor of course, but a little more even.
That's the original meaning of the word, but it has come to be a synonym for overemployment.
And I think there are plenty of people who aren't even consciously intending to scam. A while back I interviewed somebody for a 100%-time contracting position that will convert to employment. His LinkedIn listed him involved in a couple of other companies that he started. When I asked about this glaring incongruity he looked startled and said that, yes of course he was shutting those down. It felt to me like a lie made up on the spot.
He struck me as somebody who was just overextended and flailing around for immediate cash revenue. So I think he had convinced himself he could do his two companies and a full-time job. But I expect that in practice he'd stint us on hours and be so sleep-deprived during them that he'd be somewhere between marginally and negatively productive until we fired him.
But then it's hard to tell the difference between a desperate schmuck and a scammer, as I think it's a continuum. A lot of out-and-out scams get started like that.
He struck me as somebody who was just overextended and flailing around for immediate cash revenue. So I think he had convinced himself he could do his two companies and a full-time job. But I expect that in practice he'd stint us on hours and be so sleep-deprived during them that he'd be somewhere between marginally and negatively productive until we fired him.
But then it's hard to tell the difference between a desperate schmuck and a scammer, as I think it's a continuum. A lot of out-and-out scams get started like that.
> But I expect that in practice he'd stint us on hours and be so sleep-deprived during them that he'd be somewhere between marginally and negatively productive until we fired him.
To be fair, I could probably replace children with running a company on the side and still end up less sleep deprived.
To be fair, I could probably replace children with running a company on the side and still end up less sleep deprived.
i am wondering, how would that even work for any subsequent jobs, past the first set of multiple jobs done at once?
A pre-employment background check (which you typically do after accepting an offer and right before starting the job) would clearly show all your previous places of employment (for up to 7 years at the very least), along with the timelines. How would one explain that to the employer?
A pre-employment background check (which you typically do after accepting an offer and right before starting the job) would clearly show all your previous places of employment (for up to 7 years at the very least), along with the timelines. How would one explain that to the employer?
What kind of background check would reveal all previous employers? Where I’m from a background check usually consists of checking one or two (candidate provided) references and possibly googling their name for red flags.
Every single work backround check I ever had in the US included that. I do not think it lists all former employers ever tho, only those from the past 7 years iirc.
In fact, I got a copy of it back too, where it listed even some of the jobs I didn’t list myself because I didn’t think they were relevant (e.g., the grocery store job I had the summer before college, 5 years before the SWE position I was getting background checked for).
One time, it even had an interesting tidbit that got flagged. A former employer of mine didn’t exist anymore at the time of the background check (the company got absorbed into another international corp and then closed down all offices in the state I worked in, thus ceasing to exist both legally and physically). So the background check report mentioned there was an indication of me having worked there, but they couldn’t reach out to the company to verify my exact employment dates.
In fact, I got a copy of it back too, where it listed even some of the jobs I didn’t list myself because I didn’t think they were relevant (e.g., the grocery store job I had the summer before college, 5 years before the SWE position I was getting background checked for).
One time, it even had an interesting tidbit that got flagged. A former employer of mine didn’t exist anymore at the time of the background check (the company got absorbed into another international corp and then closed down all offices in the state I worked in, thus ceasing to exist both legally and physically). So the background check report mentioned there was an indication of me having worked there, but they couldn’t reach out to the company to verify my exact employment dates.
The 7 years you're referring to isn't criminal background check, which is what we generally think of when we say background check, it's credit reporting. And it's extremely unethical, in my opinion. It's outlawed in a few states.
It doesn't just show your employment for the past 7 years, it also shows your comp, your debts, your defaults, everything.
It doesn't just show your employment for the past 7 years, it also shows your comp, your debts, your defaults, everything.
My criminal checks were on the exact same report as this one, I only ever applied for one.
It didn’t have my reported salary or debts. I know because I requested a copy of the report my employer got (which afaik is a legal requirement to provide one upon request, so it was as simple as clicking a button).
In general, I have no issues with my employer knowing my previous compensation once i am employed there. At no point in my interviews in over a decade at different companies was I ever asked what I made in terms of comp before, only what I wanted to make. And the background check only comes after the offer is already agreed upon, signed, and I already started working there. So I don’t see a problem there.
It didn’t have my reported salary or debts. I know because I requested a copy of the report my employer got (which afaik is a legal requirement to provide one upon request, so it was as simple as clicking a button).
In general, I have no issues with my employer knowing my previous compensation once i am employed there. At no point in my interviews in over a decade at different companies was I ever asked what I made in terms of comp before, only what I wanted to make. And the background check only comes after the offer is already agreed upon, signed, and I already started working there. So I don’t see a problem there.
That’s just some rando googling away.
How does that have any relation to a real agency, staffed with competent experts that specialize in background checks?
How does that have any relation to a real agency, staffed with competent experts that specialize in background checks?
The credit reporting agencies can provide a list of prior employers. And comp.
Interesting, never heard of this service being provided here (EU), not even sure it would be legal, but makes sense. Apparently they get the information from credit card/mortage applications.
The overemployed crowd is two steps ahead though: https://old.reddit.com/r/overemployed/comments/10el4ll/remov...
The overemployed crowd is two steps ahead though: https://old.reddit.com/r/overemployed/comments/10el4ll/remov...
You can opt out of The Work Number (Equifax's 'employment verification' service), but you have to do it via snail mail.
If you agree to work for someone a number of hours per week, and you don't do it, while having no intention of doing it, and they are paying you while you are lying about it, that is fraud in most jurisdictions.
Technically full time positions don’t really mandate a set of hours.
Why do you call it fraud? It's not fraudulent.
It can very easily be illegal because most employment contracts I've seen include language that heads off this type of action.
Violating an employment contract is not a criminal issue, it is a civil issue at best.
The most they can realistically do to you for violating that section is just firing you. I don’t see them trying to collect the “damages” in the civil court.
The most they can realistically do to you for violating that section is just firing you. I don’t see them trying to collect the “damages” in the civil court.
That makes it a breach of contract, not illegal.
Making a contract with intent to defraud someone is not legal (i.e. pretending that you are going to work full time while knowing you are not going to do it).
Is pretending you are going to do good work but you know you are incompetent also fraud? How about the company pretending it is a good place to work but they know it actually sucks to work there? Just throwing the word fraud around at things you don't like is meaningless.
Both of these things would technically be fraud I would think. Definitely hard to prosecute due to subjectivity though.
I mean I am a member of the nba subreddit and I don't play in the nba. Heck I haven't watched a single game this year. A lot of it is just people fantasizing about it rather than doing it.
From this month's HN hiring, we might have received 30-40 resumes so far. Out of that, we have interviewed (or scheduled) around 20. There were no fake resumes; in fact we got very high quality resumes this time. There weren't any fakes in the previous months as well (in noticeable numbers).
I am not saying it's not happening. But we haven't seen it happen on HN.
I am not saying it's not happening. But we haven't seen it happen on HN.
HN doesn't seem like a very lucrative pool for scams like this one. You don't see many meh corporate development jobs posted here, which are they ones you can fake for months or years. Hard to do that when you're working daily with the founder or a smaller team.
You give way too much credit to the types of companies that get YC funding. I’ve seen a lot of meh corporate jobs posted here with corp dev type wages.
What would you call "corp dev type wages"?
Starting salaries around $70-$80K, senior salaries around $140K-$160K and “architects” around $175K.
This is in the Atlanta market where I use to live before I started working remotely and moved. I got this email from a recruiter there. It’s about the same in most major non west coast markets
(Starting on page 26) https://motionrecruitment.com/hubfs/TSG-25/Atlanta-IT-Salary...
Compare that to any of the BigTech or adjacent companies where entry level developers are getting return offers from their internships of $150K-$175K.
This is in the Atlanta market where I use to live before I started working remotely and moved. I got this email from a recruiter there. It’s about the same in most major non west coast markets
(Starting on page 26) https://motionrecruitment.com/hubfs/TSG-25/Atlanta-IT-Salary...
Compare that to any of the BigTech or adjacent companies where entry level developers are getting return offers from their internships of $150K-$175K.
Solution is extremely simple, fly the candidate out for an in-person interview. A one-time plane ticket is a tiny expense compared to paying for the company to be a fully in-office operation, or paying a fraudster's salary.
Onsite interviews were a normal practice just a few years ago.
Onsite interviews were a normal practice just a few years ago.
I agree, but as a non-American I wouldn't want to travel to America for anything work-related at the moment without a business visa, and the hassle of getting one would make hiring foreign workers much more of a chore.
So many visa and proctored exam consultancies in India and I never heard of any of them verifying interviewees for remote jobs.
Good. Fake jobs are posted all the time to "gather intelligence" at the expense of people who desperately want work.
The irony isn't lost on me how employers will post ghost positions, and use automation to sort through applications faster. While at the same time condemning automation from the applicant side, even if the automation is used in good faith.
Had one apply to my team last week, they had on their resume they worked with a tech company from 2019 to 2022 in a very specific role which would have been managed by my brother in law. Checked with him and he called BS on it. Wanted to drag them out a few rounds and do some last minute reschedules, but HR just slammed the door, saying they get lots of these now.
"Fake job seekers are flooding US companies that are hiring for remote positions"
Getting a taste of their own medicine after all those fake or evergreen postings. Feels shitty doesn't it? At least the people looking for hires still have a job to feed their families, unlike many on the job seeker side.
Getting a taste of their own medicine after all those fake or evergreen postings. Feels shitty doesn't it? At least the people looking for hires still have a job to feed their families, unlike many on the job seeker side.
Does it feel shitty? None of the CEOs interviewed in the article appear to be particularly distressed by it, and two of the three seem to be selling solutions to the problem. If anything, this ought to feel even worse for candidates - now I have to worry if Pindrop Security gave my Linkedin profile picture a 0.009 deepfake score.
I would bet very little truly feels shitty for high comp CEOs. It probably feels a little shitty for the people actually doing the interviews.
Companies hiring for remote positions shot first by creating fake openings to game candidates for their interests, salary expectations and skills. Repeatedly.
It's hilarious that the same technique is now being used against them and companies are angry and frustrated. Too bad they are not actually human to understand what those feelings mean.
It's hilarious that the same technique is now being used against them and companies are angry and frustrated. Too bad they are not actually human to understand what those feelings mean.
it does happen and companies don't like to talk about it and most have existing actors still collecting paychecks. however, we have caught the whole gambit. A lot of applicants are good the problem is there is a subset that will go to extreme lengths to trick you. Competitors will do it, and even other governments will be depending on your industry.
We talked to some recruiters recently and they essentially said atleast 1 step of the hiring process must be in person unless a valid reason can be made. i.e. single mother taking care of child going through a divorce backed up by a court record.
One fun thing to do is stress test their GPU / CPU out during part of a coding exam. (Only do this for 99% confirmed cases) This can slow the deepfake software down so much that it starts looking messed up and obvious. Securing employee onboarding with KYE IAM is also critical. Most of these people don't put much effort on the 360 review of an applicant and verifications beyond video calls spot them early on. There are countless solutions to the problem so you need to be creative. These applicants think they are next level fakes, but a lot can be spotted a mile away.
We talked to some recruiters recently and they essentially said atleast 1 step of the hiring process must be in person unless a valid reason can be made. i.e. single mother taking care of child going through a divorce backed up by a court record.
One fun thing to do is stress test their GPU / CPU out during part of a coding exam. (Only do this for 99% confirmed cases) This can slow the deepfake software down so much that it starts looking messed up and obvious. Securing employee onboarding with KYE IAM is also critical. Most of these people don't put much effort on the 360 review of an applicant and verifications beyond video calls spot them early on. There are countless solutions to the problem so you need to be creative. These applicants think they are next level fakes, but a lot can be spotted a mile away.
Pretty simple: ask these remote hires to come to the office for the first two weeks for onboarding. That will solve a lot of problems.
Don't be deceived by the fake testimonies everywhere. It took me 2 months to finally find someone who Helped but it wasn't easy because I was scammed once.
Long story short, I was very skeptical about working with this individual but I am glad I did, Webroothacker is the best when it comes to any hacking related services. They helped me recover my stolen money from an online plattform who ripped me off my life savings. WEBROOTHACKER via gmail (WEBROOTHACKER @ GM AIL COM)
Get the peace of mind you deserve with their hacking skills.
A friend of mine was a restaurant GM a while back and showed me what his applications looked like. They primarily take applicants through Indeed, and his list was absolutely flooded with foreign names of people that live nowhere near here. In his case, it was pretty trivial to sort through because they clearly didn't live here.
Unless they've changed tactics, I think they might just blow up literally any job listing they can because the cost of not getting called back is nil anyway.
Unless they've changed tactics, I think they might just blow up literally any job listing they can because the cost of not getting called back is nil anyway.
"foreign names"? Applying to a restaurant?
I should probably specify that the restaurant is in a low population area where everybody pretty much knows everyone else. And the botted applications came from people that lived nowhere near there, and were from a demographic that was all but absent from the area.
Nobody is moving across the nation to a town in the middle of nowhere to make $10/hr.
Nobody is moving across the nation to a town in the middle of nowhere to make $10/hr.
Why is he posting on indeed instead of just posting a sign in the window or just putting the word out if "everyone knows everyone"? Especially for a $10/hr restaurant job?
Somewhat inevitable. There is internet everywhere and the salary differentials to the US are wild
This is not new. This kind of things happening for long time especially for hunting high paying jobs in US. Now deep fake is just helping them a little. I joined tech industry in 2020, I did not know anything that how Pakistani/Indian/Bangladeshi companies get good bids from US clients until my friend joined industry next years. He joined a company who used to do this, and my friend help them clear interviews and get that company high paying jobs in US and he will be getting peanuts for the same job he got them probably 10k$/month. They will create fake profile of candidate of US citizen and someone during interview has to pretend to be him. Yeah of course before it has to be real human now, AI can be anyone.
And I have been contacted many times to such kind of arrangement that the offered me that we will give you realistic fake US profile, you have to give interview, if you get hired, we will take some share of salary. And I denied, as I do not want to live with feeling of guilty of lying for earning more than I need where I live, I can live way better with what I make than my other fellow countrymen.
And I have been contacted many times to such kind of arrangement that the offered me that we will give you realistic fake US profile, you have to give interview, if you get hired, we will take some share of salary. And I denied, as I do not want to live with feeling of guilty of lying for earning more than I need where I live, I can live way better with what I make than my other fellow countrymen.
This could be largely solved by letting job seekers know up front that it WILL require an in-person interview, even if the position is remote — and then doing it. The price of a few round-trip airfares & hotel nights is trivial to the cost/benefit of a successful hire vs giving access to a malicious actor. And bringing in the final 2-4 candidates for an in-person day or two without technology has real benefits.
Want to add tech to the mix? Give the hired ones in-person a device to take home that will need to be verifiably at their stated location. Also require confirmation they are located where they say they are located, maybe even hire a PI to verify. And yes, traveling digital nomads could be accommodated; "I'll be in Bali the next month"; "fine, just send us a pic of your passport stamp and the location device will confirm it". Yes, it is a bit of light surveillance, you are paying for work and basic honesty and verifiability is not too big of an ask.
Sure, some of that could be fooled by working with an accomplice, but it would certainly cut down the fakers by orders of magnitude, and the NKs by ~100%.
Want to add tech to the mix? Give the hired ones in-person a device to take home that will need to be verifiably at their stated location. Also require confirmation they are located where they say they are located, maybe even hire a PI to verify. And yes, traveling digital nomads could be accommodated; "I'll be in Bali the next month"; "fine, just send us a pic of your passport stamp and the location device will confirm it". Yes, it is a bit of light surveillance, you are paying for work and basic honesty and verifiability is not too big of an ask.
Sure, some of that could be fooled by working with an accomplice, but it would certainly cut down the fakers by orders of magnitude, and the NKs by ~100%.
No way in hell am I consenting to "install a location tracking device" and "send us proof of all travel plans".
"A bit of light surveillance" my ass.
"A bit of light surveillance" my ass.
Fine. You are free to obfuscate and/or lie about your identity and location, and they are free to hire or not hire you.
Who said anything about install? They give you a company phone.
And you really think it is unreasonable for a person/company paying you money to do a task to know where on the planet you are located, emergency contacts, etc.? What happens when you get hit by a bus in Bangkok or have a scuba incident in Bali and are in the hospital for a week or worse? You just go dark and they have no way to send aid or even get status on the work you are now suddenly not doing, or obtain the current files so someone else can make progress?
Of course there are many inconsequential gigs/jobs for which it doesn't matter if you disappear, or lie about your identity or location, or are a North Korean spy trying to destroy the company, and you're welcome to work for those.
But I'm 100% in favor of remote work, and I would not remotely consider hiring someone for any consequential project or position without knowing they are who they say they are and they are where they say they are located.
And from a Corporate and National Security perspective, while I consider Return To Office largely outrageous, it seems quite reasonable for simple physical security measures to verify an employee is who and where they say they are.
Even more so considering the massive amounts of both nation-state-level corporate espionage and remote work fraud going on.
Who said anything about install? They give you a company phone.
And you really think it is unreasonable for a person/company paying you money to do a task to know where on the planet you are located, emergency contacts, etc.? What happens when you get hit by a bus in Bangkok or have a scuba incident in Bali and are in the hospital for a week or worse? You just go dark and they have no way to send aid or even get status on the work you are now suddenly not doing, or obtain the current files so someone else can make progress?
Of course there are many inconsequential gigs/jobs for which it doesn't matter if you disappear, or lie about your identity or location, or are a North Korean spy trying to destroy the company, and you're welcome to work for those.
But I'm 100% in favor of remote work, and I would not remotely consider hiring someone for any consequential project or position without knowing they are who they say they are and they are where they say they are located.
And from a Corporate and National Security perspective, while I consider Return To Office largely outrageous, it seems quite reasonable for simple physical security measures to verify an employee is who and where they say they are.
Even more so considering the massive amounts of both nation-state-level corporate espionage and remote work fraud going on.
All of your examples fall under business continuity or ownership.
I can fall into a coma in the US. If your business depends on “being able to send aid”, then you have failed as a business.
If I am not delivering work output, terminate me.
My employer is entitled to my work output for compensation, no more, no less. The rest is an unwarranted intrusion into the rest of my life.
You are of course correct, they are free to not hire me, as I am free to not work there.
“Install” - you describe a device that reports my location, and described being required to take that with me so they could know / verify said location. That is so beyond the pale.
“Oh you said you were in Bali last week? Passport please so we can verify.”
What next? Do I need to send my after visit summaries from my doctor to HR, too?
I can fall into a coma in the US. If your business depends on “being able to send aid”, then you have failed as a business.
If I am not delivering work output, terminate me.
My employer is entitled to my work output for compensation, no more, no less. The rest is an unwarranted intrusion into the rest of my life.
You are of course correct, they are free to not hire me, as I am free to not work there.
“Install” - you describe a device that reports my location, and described being required to take that with me so they could know / verify said location. That is so beyond the pale.
“Oh you said you were in Bali last week? Passport please so we can verify.”
What next? Do I need to send my after visit summaries from my doctor to HR, too?
It seems we are talking about two different things, gig work vs employment. Also, talking about the entire company team, not just about you.
>>My employer is entitled to my work output for compensation, no more, no less.
Of course that is true if you are working on a contractor or gig basis. The spec is for "Qty X of Y widgets, with software doing Z, delivered in July to our office in Cupertino", and you have no access to their offices or systems. Working basically incognito is fine, as long as comms are maintained for reasonable updates and you deliver as, where, and when specified.
But if you are both taking on the obligations of an employer-employee relationship, including benefits, legal obligations, access to company systems & offices, use of company equipment, etc., it is not only reasonable to know you are who you say you are and where you say you are, it is the managers' responsibility to know.
If your CEO comes to ask about and engineering issue on Project Sigma, and your report "Joe" is responsible, but you haven't heard from "Joe" in a week, and the last you knew he was flying to Australia, but you can't say if "Joe" is working in Sydney, beaching in Bali, or selling secrets in Shanghai to a Chinese competitor, and you don't even really know who "Joe" is, it seems you have not only dropped the ball but lost the plot. And probably your management job.
>>If your business depends on “being able to send aid”, then you have failed as a business.
Of course it is a mgt failure to structure your org with a single point of failure. But if an employee has responsibilities so trivial it makes no difference if they suddenly disappear, why were they even on payroll?
Why is it unreasonable to expect an employee to take care of themselves and company laptop/phone/etc., and be in reliable and honest contact so if something does happen, you can take steps to help, such as knowing where to send a replacement laptop or updated team info?
>>If I am not delivering work output, terminate me.
Of course, but the context here is dishonest employees stealing corporate secrets for enemy nation-states or stealing payroll until they are found out.
The costs of secret stealing can easily be company bankruptcy and unemployment for every other employee, and national security breaches.
The costs to bogus employees or dishonest 'overworkers'[0] stealing payroll until they are found out is beyond just stolen paychecks, it's also the overhead and lack of progress for the rest of the team.
More generally, it's important for remote work options to thrive, and if the basis is "F.U., you can't even know who or where I am, don't pay me if you don't like it.", almost all employers will make their policy: "sit your butt in this specific office chair 9-5 M-F". I'm a strong advocate of remote work, and have sat in the employer's chair many times, but if those are the only two options, my only choice is RTO.
>>required to take that with me so they could know / verify said location. That is so beyond the pale.
I disagree. This is not like monitoring cameras/microphones/keystrokes (even 'tho similar monitoring in an office is trivial by walking to someone's cubicle). But to claim that your employer or manager (not gig-work contract mgr) can not even know what hemisphere or time zone you are in seems absurd. And no, daily "were you really at the Dr.?" stuff isn't the point of my solution either. I am literally saying only that you should be verifiably open about who you are and where you are on an every-few-days basis.
So, in the context of corporate/international espionage and dishonest employees and agencies stealing everything from the company jewels to payroll, what solution do YOU have that makes remote work viable? That's a serious question.
.
.
.
[0] I've got no problem with people who remotely 'overwork' two remote jobs if they can honestly keep up with their responsibilities for both. I have a big problem with people taking on more paychecks than they possibly can and just riding it until they are terminated, or "agencies" dishonestly posing as a single employee. Both are fine if everyone fully and transparently understands the situation, but fundamentally dishonest if done with deception. Just like open honest polyamory is fine, but cheating on your spouse is not.
>>My employer is entitled to my work output for compensation, no more, no less.
Of course that is true if you are working on a contractor or gig basis. The spec is for "Qty X of Y widgets, with software doing Z, delivered in July to our office in Cupertino", and you have no access to their offices or systems. Working basically incognito is fine, as long as comms are maintained for reasonable updates and you deliver as, where, and when specified.
But if you are both taking on the obligations of an employer-employee relationship, including benefits, legal obligations, access to company systems & offices, use of company equipment, etc., it is not only reasonable to know you are who you say you are and where you say you are, it is the managers' responsibility to know.
If your CEO comes to ask about and engineering issue on Project Sigma, and your report "Joe" is responsible, but you haven't heard from "Joe" in a week, and the last you knew he was flying to Australia, but you can't say if "Joe" is working in Sydney, beaching in Bali, or selling secrets in Shanghai to a Chinese competitor, and you don't even really know who "Joe" is, it seems you have not only dropped the ball but lost the plot. And probably your management job.
>>If your business depends on “being able to send aid”, then you have failed as a business.
Of course it is a mgt failure to structure your org with a single point of failure. But if an employee has responsibilities so trivial it makes no difference if they suddenly disappear, why were they even on payroll?
Why is it unreasonable to expect an employee to take care of themselves and company laptop/phone/etc., and be in reliable and honest contact so if something does happen, you can take steps to help, such as knowing where to send a replacement laptop or updated team info?
>>If I am not delivering work output, terminate me.
Of course, but the context here is dishonest employees stealing corporate secrets for enemy nation-states or stealing payroll until they are found out.
The costs of secret stealing can easily be company bankruptcy and unemployment for every other employee, and national security breaches.
The costs to bogus employees or dishonest 'overworkers'[0] stealing payroll until they are found out is beyond just stolen paychecks, it's also the overhead and lack of progress for the rest of the team.
More generally, it's important for remote work options to thrive, and if the basis is "F.U., you can't even know who or where I am, don't pay me if you don't like it.", almost all employers will make their policy: "sit your butt in this specific office chair 9-5 M-F". I'm a strong advocate of remote work, and have sat in the employer's chair many times, but if those are the only two options, my only choice is RTO.
>>required to take that with me so they could know / verify said location. That is so beyond the pale.
I disagree. This is not like monitoring cameras/microphones/keystrokes (even 'tho similar monitoring in an office is trivial by walking to someone's cubicle). But to claim that your employer or manager (not gig-work contract mgr) can not even know what hemisphere or time zone you are in seems absurd. And no, daily "were you really at the Dr.?" stuff isn't the point of my solution either. I am literally saying only that you should be verifiably open about who you are and where you are on an every-few-days basis.
So, in the context of corporate/international espionage and dishonest employees and agencies stealing everything from the company jewels to payroll, what solution do YOU have that makes remote work viable? That's a serious question.
.
.
.
[0] I've got no problem with people who remotely 'overwork' two remote jobs if they can honestly keep up with their responsibilities for both. I have a big problem with people taking on more paychecks than they possibly can and just riding it until they are terminated, or "agencies" dishonestly posing as a single employee. Both are fine if everyone fully and transparently understands the situation, but fundamentally dishonest if done with deception. Just like open honest polyamory is fine, but cheating on your spouse is not.
> Once hired, an impostor can install malware to demand a ransom from a company, or steal its customer data, trade secrets or funds.
I'm getting whiplash from how quickly this article jumps to conclusions. Most corporate cybersecurity is quite strong. Why is this the very first conclusion they come to? Not even that the fake profiles collect a salary, just.. "virus!!!"
I'm getting whiplash from how quickly this article jumps to conclusions. Most corporate cybersecurity is quite strong. Why is this the very first conclusion they come to? Not even that the fake profiles collect a salary, just.. "virus!!!"
Most? Maybe for large companies. I work with a lot of SMBs and half of them are happy to use the gateway built into their cable modem, and install no additional security whatsoever. While running OSs that are beyond end of life.
Ever thus. The first programming job I had after high school, I got in part by pointing out that I hadn't previously seen Windows XP Pro machines with publicly routable IPv4 addresses, and suggesting one reason for their persistent slowness might be the effect of putting unfirewalled XP machines on the public Internet - a very bad idea, even in 2004.
A side effect of this that I've started to notice on a few of my repositories are fake accounts trying to bolster their perceived credibility when they are very obviously (terrible) AI accounts - down to their profile READMEs (on GitHub) that have obvious LLM output, pointing to links that don't exist, etc. and in some cases even LinkedIn profiles that are completely fabricated.
I just had a PR opened that was a two character change, in Javascript, changing `if (!warned)` to `if (!== warned)`. They assured me, in an H1 no less, that they had tested everything and that it was fixing some problem, but didn't say what.
What the hell is happening, and what are we supposed to collectively do about this? Or is this just some new norm we'll have to adapt to?
I just had a PR opened that was a two character change, in Javascript, changing `if (!warned)` to `if (!== warned)`. They assured me, in an H1 no less, that they had tested everything and that it was fixing some problem, but didn't say what.
What the hell is happening, and what are we supposed to collectively do about this? Or is this just some new norm we'll have to adapt to?
The cooperate dystopia comes ever more into sight. Every interaction with the outside is on a budget. You can improve yourself (expensive, hard work) or you can spam your competitors with garbage, until they just cease to function.
Perhaps companies should go back to promoting their job openings at in person events? I remember a couple years ago when I went to a job faire, it was typical for recruiters to politely refuse your printed resume and instead suggest you apply through their online portal. Now that bots/AI have made applying trivial and resulted in a deluge of applications they can't seem to properly filter, I think it's time to try a different approach.
>Now that bots/AI have made applying trivial and resulted in a deluge of applications they can't seem to properly filter, I think it's time to try a different approach.
I have this theory in general that paper is going to make a huge comeback. We've passed the point now where there is no meaningful way to tell if something is AI unless it physically cannot be. Hand written paper and physical art is literally the only thing left that passes this.
I have this theory in general that paper is going to make a huge comeback. We've passed the point now where there is no meaningful way to tell if something is AI unless it physically cannot be. Hand written paper and physical art is literally the only thing left that passes this.
Just you wait til I hook up a pen to my 3d printer (I know people have already done this)
I suggested this to a coworker at my job and he responded as if I had slapped a baby. I guess it is like telling a hammer company that a screwdriver may be the better tool in some use cases.
Hired someone recently. I sat in on several remote interviews and a couple ... I was suspicious.
I didn't see any "AI" candidates, but I was suspicious about a few / if they were in fact who they said they were.
The part I worry about is that maybe I was just too suspicious and some poor guy was playing it straight and I gave a thumbs down due to my suspicions.
I didn't see any "AI" candidates, but I was suspicious about a few / if they were in fact who they said they were.
The part I worry about is that maybe I was just too suspicious and some poor guy was playing it straight and I gave a thumbs down due to my suspicions.
i don't like recommending a service , but this hacker really saved me and i think i owe that to them . Are you curious? and you want to penetrate into your spouse, child or any device/ worry no more .contact TECHSPYMAX @ gm ail com they can penetrate any device , social media account, delete content from the internet and so more remotely without any trace. i'm so grateful to them , they help save me from a toxic relationship
Are they applying to all the fake jobs?
Yeah, this seems like a fair turnaround for the folks who've been wasting applicants' time for decades.
> ...seems like a fair turnaround for...
Except the "them" who've been wasting applicants' time for decades is not the same as the "them" who are facing the flood of fake job seekers.
It's generally preferable that "justice" treats innocent parties and guilty parties quite differently.
Except the "them" who've been wasting applicants' time for decades is not the same as the "them" who are facing the flood of fake job seekers.
It's generally preferable that "justice" treats innocent parties and guilty parties quite differently.
I can't stress this enough. There seem to be a great desire among some to punnish totally uninvolved people for some sort of systematic problem. Imagine being a prince from Nigeria ...
Idk dude. The schadenfreude is real. If a company wants to self-immolate to chase shadows, I will happily watch.
Is it a fair turnaround for the honest folks just trying to get a job the old fashioned way, whose resumes will get drowned in the sea of AI trash?
Pretty much so. Next to impossible to actually apply to a job.
I'm very experienced, live in the US and a friendly chap who interviews well, but because of everyone is using AI (applicants, recruiters, employers), it's next to impossible to get a reply to any posting or get trough to a 'human'.
I'm very experienced, live in the US and a friendly chap who interviews well, but because of everyone is using AI (applicants, recruiters, employers), it's next to impossible to get a reply to any posting or get trough to a 'human'.
AI interviewer interviewing AI interviewee - welcome to 2025
So fly the person out for an in-person interview back like we did in the ancient year of 2019? This seems like a total non-problem to me.
That sure won't make it easier to apply for full remote jobs...
> Fake job seekers are flooding US companies that are hiring for remote positions
The empire strikes back. Until now, the job market, was flooded with false vacancies.
The empire strikes back. Until now, the job market, was flooded with false vacancies.
Fake job ads, fake job applicants...I'm starting to think I was accidentally prescient when I found my bookbinding hobby a few years back.
Oh, they're nothing fancy, just perfect-bound with card covers and spines hand-lettered in silver paint on black bookbinder's tape. But they're workmanlike and sturdy and sound in the hand, and maybe it'll be worth someone's value to own words that not only have obviously been labored over at length, but that never change even when no one is looking at them.
Why not, I suppose. Printed words are already becoming a luxury, with the decline in material and workmanship in modern hardbound "prestige" editions reflecting their place among the economy of aspirational, status- and status-anxiety-signaling goods. Obviously I would have no market among these dreary neoliberal bourgeoisie, but I'm sure there are a few perverts on websites like this one who'd pay more for the produce of hours in an attic over hand tools and muttered swears, for something that even if it's just a trade paperback still feels and reads the way a book should.
Oh, they're nothing fancy, just perfect-bound with card covers and spines hand-lettered in silver paint on black bookbinder's tape. But they're workmanlike and sturdy and sound in the hand, and maybe it'll be worth someone's value to own words that not only have obviously been labored over at length, but that never change even when no one is looking at them.
Why not, I suppose. Printed words are already becoming a luxury, with the decline in material and workmanship in modern hardbound "prestige" editions reflecting their place among the economy of aspirational, status- and status-anxiety-signaling goods. Obviously I would have no market among these dreary neoliberal bourgeoisie, but I'm sure there are a few perverts on websites like this one who'd pay more for the produce of hours in an attic over hand tools and muttered swears, for something that even if it's just a trade paperback still feels and reads the way a book should.
I think this article was written by AI. Seems like conspiracy nonsense.
Simple fix: Hire onshore persons, interview in person. Pay a living salary.
this is why we can't have nice things.
Hem I miss a point: how the scammer earn money doing so? Because such credible deepfakes (not much credible anyway) are damn expensive...
Is it legal yet to require a Real ID when hiring in the US?
There's I-9. Or sign up for e-verify if you're that concerned.
"Flooding US companies"? I don't think so. The article lost my trust when it framed the North Korea incident like this:
> More than 300 U.S. firms inadvertently hired impostors with ties to North Korea for IT work
"Impostors" implies that the people they hired couldn't do the job. That's not true: These were people who just faked their location/identity. They had the skills and worked for a long time for those companies. As far as the company was concerned, they were just regular employees. If they couldn't do the job they would've been fired.
If these "impostor" employees actually couldn't do the job and they somehow were able to stick around for as long as they did there's a different sort of crisis going on in "US companies" that has to do with management.
> More than 300 U.S. firms inadvertently hired impostors with ties to North Korea for IT work
"Impostors" implies that the people they hired couldn't do the job. That's not true: These were people who just faked their location/identity. They had the skills and worked for a long time for those companies. As far as the company was concerned, they were just regular employees. If they couldn't do the job they would've been fired.
If these "impostor" employees actually couldn't do the job and they somehow were able to stick around for as long as they did there's a different sort of crisis going on in "US companies" that has to do with management.
So one, I don't think you know what the word "impostor" means. If somebody faked your wife's identity, I think you could be reasonably upset even if she could "do the job" adequately, and it would be weird indeed to say she wasn't an impostor.
But two, are you serious with "If they couldn't do the job they would've been fired"? I think the most charitable assumption I could make is that you must not have been in the working world long. There are plenty of places that are bad noticing and getting rid of underperformers, even when everybody involved is well meaning. If somebody is actively running it as a scam, it could be hard indeed to detect. And really, they don't have to evade detection forever. Even a few months of paycheck may be more than enough for them to cover the costs of getting the jobs.
But two, are you serious with "If they couldn't do the job they would've been fired"? I think the most charitable assumption I could make is that you must not have been in the working world long. There are plenty of places that are bad noticing and getting rid of underperformers, even when everybody involved is well meaning. If somebody is actively running it as a scam, it could be hard indeed to detect. And really, they don't have to evade detection forever. Even a few months of paycheck may be more than enough for them to cover the costs of getting the jobs.
This could be solved by companies charging $1 to apply for a given position. Same as charging people a small amount to send emails. Turn the economics in your favor.
Undoubtedly there would be many who would say "I would never spend even one cent to apply for a job position". However, given that such positions tend to pay tens of dollars per hour, and given that a proper application takes at least a few minutes to fill out, I think this is economically unviable. And, of course, if I'm wrong and you now have thousands of applicants anyway, you then have a small fund to draw from for other recruiting activities like in-person interviews.
Undoubtedly there would be many who would say "I would never spend even one cent to apply for a job position". However, given that such positions tend to pay tens of dollars per hour, and given that a proper application takes at least a few minutes to fill out, I think this is economically unviable. And, of course, if I'm wrong and you now have thousands of applicants anyway, you then have a small fund to draw from for other recruiting activities like in-person interviews.
Works both ways. How many time have devs wasted their time where it says 'competitive salary' (which they don't want to reveal) but in fact it's nowhere close.
Or a job description which has X, but X is a very small subset but in fact its a mostly legacy system using Y.
Want to pay me for my time?
Or a job description which has X, but X is a very small subset but in fact its a mostly legacy system using Y.
Want to pay me for my time?
Great, now we get 100x more fake jobs flooding the internet.
Some background. I'm a senior developer who has performed hundreds of interviews and seen dozens of questionable recruits long before AI. Typically the scam is that an offshore consultancy wants to place some roles to collect wages. Many of these agencies are from collectivist cultures, so in the mind of the agency, they all work in our project. This may not be true, but the agency sees the position as theirs, not the recruit's. So they typically don't the issue with putting recruit A in front of the interviewer and then slotting recruit B in after the position is secured. I've seen this done with A talking while B moves their lips on camera. Now with chatGPT (and earlier to some degree with just Google Search) we just see applicants eyes focused on something they're reading when we ask questions. All of this is just as easy as an AI generated applicant (if not easier) and quite likely to get the recruit hired.
A lot of this narrative is pointing the finger at China, North Korea and Russia/Ukraine. The best candidates I've fielded have been Ukrainian, Russian and Chinese. These are countries well known for their tech sectors. North Korea has executed the largest crypto heists in history. These are not groups who need to fake it.
So who does this narrative serve? It serves the RTO CEOs. This makes CEOs scared to hire remote workers and lets the ones who demand it have a reason.
If anything the panic around AI should reinforce the need to think critically about these things.