"The best candidates use AI but stand firmly between its output and what they'll present back to me. They know their material back to front. They probably wrote a bunch of it themselves, or shaped it hard."
"The vast majority of responses have been 3-4 slides per minute of allotted time, containing an absolute soup of paragraphs, bullet points and drivel. It's not clear that they've even read them."
"You are accountable for your output. The AI does not look bad if your AI slop is on show. You do. Especially if the person the other end knows anything about how these models work."
"Once you see the AI tropes, you can't unsee them. This has been true of written words since GPT-3 when the Jasper AI slop cannon reared its muzzle."
AI is frequently used to assist in creating presentations, but many users fail to critically evaluate the AI-generated content. Successful candidates utilize AI to enhance their work while maintaining a strong understanding of the material. In contrast, many presenters deliver cluttered slides filled with excessive text, indicating a lack of editorial oversight. This issue has persisted since the introduction of AI models like GPT-3, resulting in recognizable patterns that detract from the quality of communication and accountability for the output.
Read at Jonnyburch
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]