Wiingy AI is building a network of subject-matter experts to work on projects with companies developing advanced AI models.

Currently looking for:

Healthcare & Life Sciences · Engineering · Audio · Music · AI Safety · Finance · Computer Science · Physics · Biology · Coding · Mathematics · Chemistry

What you’ll do:
- Evaluate and improve AI-generated responses
- Create and review expert-level questions and solutions
- Help build training data, benchmarks, and AI evaluations

Who can apply:
- Master's, PhD, or equivalent expertise in your field
- Strong subject knowledge and analytical skills
- Ability to evaluate and explain complex problems

Remote | Flexible | 10–20 hrs/week | USD 20-40/hour

This is a talent network, so projects vary based on your expertise and availability.

Apply Here - https://wiingy.ai/experts

Comment "Interested" and I can share more details.

Comparing https://resume.zoevera.com against https://chatgpt.com

And what a purpose-built ATS checker caught that GPT-4 didn’t.

Let me be upfront: I use ChatGPT for everything. Code reviews, draft emails, explaining stack traces at 2am. It’s genuinely useful. So when I needed to tailor my resume for a senior backend role, my first instinct was to open a chat window.

That was three weeks ago. Here’s what I learned.

What ChatGPT actually does well

Ask ChatGPT to “improve my resume” and it will:

• Clean up passive voice (“responsible for” → “led”)
• Suggest stronger action verbs
• Add structure and formatting consistency
• Rewrite vague bullets into something that sounds more impressive

For general writing quality, it’s genuinely good. If your resume reads like it was written by someone who hasn’t slept in 48 hours, ChatGPT will fix that.

What ChatGPT fundamentally cannot do

Here’s the problem: ChatGPT doesn’t know what job you’re applying for.

You can paste the job description into the prompt, sure. But there’s no mechanism for it to:

1. Score your resume against that specific JD — it has no concept of a match percentage
2. Identify which keywords are present vs. missing — it will suggest improvements but won’t systematically audit keyword coverage
3. Know how Applicant Tracking Systems parse text — it will rewrite content without knowing whether an ATS will ever see it

ATS filters work on keyword frequency and placement. A resume that reads beautifully to a human can score 40% on an ATS if the right terms aren’t in the right sections. ChatGPT optimizes for human readers. ATS systems are not human readers.

I ran a test. Same resume, same job description (Backend Engineer, Node.js/AWS stack). I gave ChatGPT the full JD and asked it to optimize my resume for ATS.

The output was well-written. It added “microservices” and “REST APIs” in a few places. But it missed:

• “AWS Lambda” — mentioned 4 times in the JD, absent from my resume after the rewrite
• “CI/CD pipeline” — appeared in the required skills section, never added
• The Projects section — ChatGPT rewrote my experience bullets but left the Projects section untouched, which is where most of my relevant backend work lived

When I ran the same resume through resume.zoevera.com, it flagged all three gaps explicitly, with section-level attribution. The ATS match score went from 54% to 81% after applying the suggested changes.

The core difference: diagnostic vs. generative

ChatGPT is a generative tool. It produces new text. It’s very good at that.

An ATS checker is a diagnostic tool first. It measures the gap between your resume and a specific job description, then tells you exactly what’s missing. The rewrite comes second — and it’s grounded in what was actually identified as absent, not what the model thinks sounds better.

This distinction matters because:

ChatGPT hallucinates improvements. It will add metrics you never achieved (“improved system performance by 35%”), use terminology that
sounds right but wasn’t in the JD, and rewrite bullets that didn’t need rewriting while leaving critical gaps untouched. Every line needsfact-checking.

A purpose-built tool works from the actual gap. The keywords it adds are the ones the JD asked for. The sections it flags are the ones the ATS will score. The output is closer to submission-ready.

A practical workflow

These tools aren’t mutually exclusive. The best result I got came from using both in sequence:

1. ATS checker first: identify the keyword gaps and get a scored rewrite that closes them
2. ChatGPT second: use it to polish tone, tighten sentences, and clean up anything that sounds mechanical

The ATS checker handles precision. ChatGPT handles prose quality. Neither does both well alone.

The cost argument

ChatGPT Plus is $20/month. If you’re actively job searching, that’s a fixed overhead whether you use it or not.

Most people search for jobs in windows — a few weeks of active applications, then nothing for months. A per-session model makes more
sense: pay when you need it, nothing when you don’t. ZoeVera’s pricing works that way — free analysis, one-time payment for the full
rewrite, no subscription.

For a developer audience specifically: if you’re applying to 10–15 roles over two weeks, you’re not optimizing resumes 365 days a year. The math on a monthly subscription doesn’t work.

What I’d actually recommend

• If you just need better writing: ChatGPT is fine and you already have it
• If you’re applying to roles where ATS filtering is real (any company using Workday, Greenhouse, Lever, iCIMS): use a dedicated ATS checker first, then polish with ChatGPT
• If you’re a developer and haven’t thought about this: your resume probably uses technical jargon that means something to you and nothing to an ATS keyword parser. “Built scalable backend” is not the same as “developed microservices architecture using Node.js and AWS ambda” — even if the underlying work is identical

The ATS doesn’t know what you meant. It only knows what you wrote.

Tested against a real Backend Engineer job description. Tools used: ChatGPT GPT-4o, https://resume.zoevera.com. June 2026.

I’m one of the co-founders of Pila8. We’re hiring people to participate in live, role-played conversations for $30/hour. We live match you with another participant. One person plays the user, while the other acts as an AI assistant 🤖

You’ll receive a short scenario and the conversation itself should mimic that of a friend you are talking to 👯

What you need:

• Quiet background
• Computer with reliable internet
• Headphones/Working Microphone
• No acting or AI experience required
• Each participant is paid separately via bank transfer, PayPal, Venmo, etc

Pila8 Key Highlights 🦊:

• Daily streak bonus multiplier (+20%)
• Weekly office hours
• Active and fast-growing Discord community
• Consistently new opportunities posted
• Swag Rewards Program

Sign up here: pila8.com

Steps:

1. 3-5 minute: Voice Test
2. Project: Engaging Companion Conversation
   • Office Hours available with me :)

If you are interested, please fill out this form: https://forms.gle/xCaxJqFRGGwtzpmX6

EDIT: This project is USA and Canada accents only! My apologies for not having thought through putting that in the first time!

CTOs, engineering managers, and staff engineers are rushing to deploy autonomous AI agents across their businesses – either through their own volition or because of the clamor of demand from rank-and-file workers. However, they should think twice, a new study shows.

Enterprise large language model (LLM) agents are likely leaking company secrets, and throwing more compute at the problem is only making it worse, the study finds.

In part, that’s because of the AI’s ability to retrieve and synthesize vast amounts of internal data, from Slack messages to board transcripts, to automate tasks. By gathering that information, they also create issues with contextual integrity.

When retrieving dense corporate data, these agents routinely fail to disentangle essential task data from sensitive, contextually inappropriate information. Higher task completion rates often directly correlate with increased privacy violations.

Read the full story: https://leaddev.com/ai/frontier-ai-models-haemorrhage-sensitive-data

THIS IS A PAID TASK JUST 5 MIN TASK

All you need to do is leave a comment to help this reach more people.(Paid task),-,-

micro1 is hiring Game Developers (Engine Specialists) to build simulation environments for AI systems.

Requirements:

• Experience with Godot and/or Panda3D (must)
• Strong Python and GDScript skills
• Good understanding of game physics and real-time systems

What you’ll do:

• Build and optimize game environments and simulations
• Develop game logic and physics systems
• Work with AI teams to create training environments

Details:

• Type - Contract
• Location - Remote
• Pay - $80-120 per hour
• Openings - Multiple (urgent hiring)

APPLY HERE - https://jobs.micro1.ai/post/game-developers-engine-specialists

Sign up and complete the AI interview to be considered. Shortlisted candidates will be contacted within a few days.

If you're a game engine expert who wants to push into AI and simulation, this role is built for you.

Important: micro1 is looking to fill this role urgently.

(Disclosure: Shared as part of the micro1 referral program)

A major AI research organization is currently looking for Generalist Evaluators to support projects involving AI-generated audio, transcription quality reviews, and language model evaluation. This is a remote opportunity for individuals who are detail-oriented and interested in helping improve cutting-edge artificial intelligence systems.

Position: Generalist
Compensation: Approximately $50–$100 per hour (depending on project and qualifications)
Location: Remote — open to applicants located in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, and eligible countries within the European Union
Time Commitment: Flexible, typically between 10 and 40 hours per week

Evaluators may be asked to review AI outputs, assess transcription accuracy, analyze responses generated by language models, and provide feedback that helps improve system performance.

If you’d like more information or would like the application link, please click below:

https://t.mercor.com/Pi9U4

LIMITED TO THE FIRST 100 APPLICANTS

This list has been created to help remote job seekers avoid encountering scam posts about roles & gigs that aren’t worth their time or skills.

These are not immediate-payment opportunities. Selection can take weeks, and landing a quality project may take months.

Most roles require domain expertise, tech skills, or previous experience with AI.

The platforms in this list have been curated based on:

• Personal experience working with some of them, and/or
• Detailed research, including verified cases of people genuinely getting hired and paid

Most of these platforms follow a rigorous selection process, which may include:

• Skill screening and assessments
• Technical or AI interviews
• Final client approval before onboarding

Personal Recommendations:

Mercor - https://www.mercor.com/
• Work - AI-related contracts
• Skill level - Medium → Advanced
• Pay - $50 - $350/hr
• Payout - Bank transfer (Stripe Connect)
• Notes - AI interview screening, Contract-based AI Data training projects

micro1 - https://www.micro1.ai/
• Work - AI, domain expertise & data roles
• Skill level - Medium → Advanced
• Pay - $30 - $200/hr
• Payout - Bank transfer (Deel)
• Notes - Selective hiring, mostly Long-term AI training contracts

After Query - https://experts.afterquery.com/
• Work - AI domain expertise
• Skill level - Medium → Expert → Advanced
• Pay - $20 - $250/hr
• Payout - Bank transfer (Stripe Connect)
• Notes - Best for domain experts (Finance, Tech)

SME Careers - https://sme.careers/
• Work - Subject Matter Experts
• Skill level - Medium → Expert
• Pay - $20 - $120/hr
• Payout - Bank transfer (Deel)
• Notes - Best for domain experts (Finance, Tech, Engineering, Linguist)

Vetto AI - https://work.vetto.ai/
• Work - AI training, domain expert tasks (health, travel, wellness)
• Skill level - Intermediate → Expert
• Pay - $10 - $100/hr
• Payout - Bank transfer (Rippling)
• Notes - Focus on non-tech experts, flexible project-based work, early-stage platform

Ethos - https://www.askethos.com/
• Work - Expert calls, market research & data annotation
• Skill level - Medium → Advanced
• Pay - $50+/hr
• Payout - Bank transfer
• Notes - Early stage, so call volume may be low.

Braintrust - https://www.usebraintrust.com/
• Work - Freelance AI, software & data jobs
• Skill level - Medium → Expert
• Pay - Varies by client
• Payout - Crypto
• Notes - Web3-based AI & tech talent network

Turing - https://www.turing.com/
• Work - Remote software dev, AI training, data & LLM roles
• Skill level - Intermediate → Expert
• Pay - $30 - $200/hr (some roles higher)
• Payout - Bank transfer (Deel)
• Notes - AI-powered matching, strong vetting, project-based work with global clients

Outlier - https://app.outlier.ai/
• Work - AI data tasks, Annotation
• Skill level - Beginner → Medium
• Pay - $5 - $30/hr
• Payout - PayPal
• Notes - Project-based

DataAnnotation - https://www.dataannotation.tech/
• Work - LLM training, AI text & reasoning
• Skill level - Medium
• Pay - $20 - $60/hr
• Payout - PayPal
• Notes - Assessment required, work availability varies

Alignerr - https://www.app.alignerr.com/
• Work - LLM training & AI evaluation
• Skill level: Medium → Expert
• Pay - $40 - $150/hr
• Payout - Stripe/Wise
• Notes - Selective onboarding, project-based work

Important notes

• If Stripe isn’t available in your country, platforms will create a Stripe Connect account for payouts.
• Always read payout cycles, minimum hours, and project terms.
• Join their official Discords/Telegrams/socials for updates.

If you find this useful, an upvote helps it reach more people looking for legit remote sites.