u/OrderNo1122

You know, in another world, we, as an industry, might have welcomed AI.

Imagine if AI was used as a real time reviewer of our work. Pointing out omissions, inconsistencies, number mismatches, etc.

Imagine if AI was used like a bilingual Grammarly-like assistant, suggesting, in a non-obtrusive way, stylistic improvements.

Imagine if AI could reliably fix QA errors and just require us to quickly confirm the change.

Imagine if AI could automatically provide sources and existing translations for us when quoting or referencing things.

Imagine if companies had decided that this was the correct way to use AI rather than as the translator itself, giving the human worker the shittiest part of the work flow.

I know it still would have resulted in translation becoming less feasible as a full time career as review work was often a solid income earner too, but I think the impact would have been lesser this way overall and it would have, at least, made the translator's job more efficient, which is what AI is supposed to do

I dunno...

Sometimes, it just makes me sad.

So, I'm a freelance translator who also dabbles in a few side-hustle type jobs, but I can see which way the wind is blowing and have been trying (unsuccessfully) to land a retail or factory job for the past few years (part time or full time, I don't mind).

And, as with a lot of others out there, it's been a truly depressing experience.

Just yesterday, I got a reply back from Aldi that they aren't going to proceed with my application (I didn't even get to the interview stage), which really sucked.

But then I was thinking...

You know how a lot of recruitment seems to be done by AI these days, at least in the early filtering stages? Well, why should we, the public, not be allowed to demand feedback as to why we were not chosen for given roles?

AI is already undermining us in so many ways and taking away things that were considered givens not that long ago, so, if we are going to have to accept that they are here to stay, why can we not demand transparency from the AI companies who create these models as to why they make the decisions they do in recruitment situations?

You could possibly understand why human recruiters cannot give individual feedback as that would be a lot of work, but one of the things AI is actually good at is performing these types of task efficiently. It wouldn't require any great resources to achieve. It's basically just another systematic prompt among thousands of others.

I just want to know why I wasn't selected for an interview for Aldi, or for Centra, or for the meat packing factory or for Apple Green. I want to know what it is on my CV or cover letter that keeps letting me down.

It doesn't seem too much to ask given the already huge levels of power we have given over to AI companies.

Do you not think so?

For the generalists out there, what are the types of tasks that you enjoy doing the most?

I'm still very new and haven't had very much work come my way, but of the projects that I have worked on, it has been factuality-centred tasks that I have found to be the most in line with my preferences.

I don't mind tasks that involve rating on axes or rubric based tasks, but overall I feel most confident in my ability to fact check.

If only I was receiving those tasks right now. I haven't had one since I got accepted onto one such (seemingly) major project.

How about the rest of you?

So, I'm new and I received an email and message this evening asking me if I could help on an image based rubric task localised to my country.

​

I was a bit unsure, but it was labelled as General (and coding, but there were no coding elements within the task), so I thought I would give it a go.

​

I think I was able to follow the instructions, but as I submitted, I realised that I might have done something incorrectly (added rubrics that were not necessarily related to anything in the prompt).

​

I don't know if this counts as a critical error, but let's say it does get flagged as one in the review, would this essentially mean that I am off the project or is there some understanding that on your first task, you might not get everything right?

​

I probably should have skipped the task for someone with more experience, but given the lack of generalist work, I've been waiting to get my teeth into something for the past two weeks and this seemed to be the best opportunity.

​

I don't think my work was awful, but I'm just concerned that the bit that I think I got wrong will really count against me.

​

Any thoughts anyone?

Hey everyone

So, I'm new on here and other than a batch of simple response to prompt ratings tasks, I hadn't had anything much to do on my dashboard until this morning.

When I checked my dashboard this morning, I had a batch of tasks in which we were supposed to rate the responses to prompts asking it to help the user with something quite complex.

As an example, helping a user develop an app from scratch.

The thing is I don't know if I'm able for this type of task.

The response was like a short document's length long and was basically incomprehensible to me (in terms of the big picture, not the language used).

It just felt like a long rambling mess of ideas (no concrete steps) of what the user could build.

Now, the thing is, I don't know if this is just a personal thing where I don't have the patience to scroll through lists and bullet points, vague ideas and platitudes or if this is what the user wanted (their follow ups in the conversation were one liners and read to me like they wanted the AI to build the app for them, but I'm not a mind reader).

I skipped the task and went to the next one, but again the response was long and hard for me to stay engaged with, which leads me to think I'm just lazy and/or thick.

I was hoping there would be some fact checking type tasks and rating of responses to questions about factual claims as I feel good about my ability to research and rate those things, but t is it more the case that most tasks are going to be like the ones I got this morning? Having to breakdown long, complex responses to more involved questions?

It's just left me feeling a bit dejected because I feel like I'm a bit out of my depth.

Or is it just not the right project for me? Can I expect there to be other projects more in line with what I was expecting?

Cheers

For people who already have built up investments (whether in ETFs, stocks, or whatever else), how many of you intend to move over to the new savings scheme once it comes in?

Would you sell your existing portfolios and move it all over wholesale? Assign a certain proportion of your future investments to the new scheme while also continuing to invest in your old portfolios? Stop investing in your current portfolio but keep it invested and then channel all future investments into the new scheme?

Or not bother with it at all?

I've only been investing in ETFs for a little over a year, but I'm still hesitant to stop investing in them as they are performing fairly decently. But on the other hand, if there are decent advantages to using the government scheme, I suppose it might be worth doing it regardless.

What's everyone else's plans?

Hey everyone not strictly game related but this seems like a place I'd find the information I'm looking for.

I've got a Mac desktop that I don't use and want to give it to my mum in the UK but I'm having trouble finding a cardboard box big enough to contain it for sending by mail (I have the original box but I'd be worried about sending it in that in case it attracts the attention of someone opportunistic).

So, I was thinking could I just wrap it (in its box) in a bin bag and check it in on a flight and take it over manually? It's definitely too big to bring on board but I'm sure it could fit in the hold. I know I'd have to wrap it like crazy but it seems doable, right?

Anyone else done this or found a way to ship a desktop?

Cheers