Interesting... Then app questions weren't a particularly high decisive factor, I reckon? I am a coach for one competition, and whenever we assemble a new team, I put their motivational answers into an AI detector before making a final decision. If it's 20%, then I let it go, of course, but if it's 80-90%...
P.S. I am not against AI, but how you use it demonstrates intelligence, in my view
I read an article about AI detector and it turns out can't fully differentiate the human factor. Nowadays LLM is smart, if you prompted them to humanise the respond and specifically elaborate how is your writing style, lexical resources level, use of contractions, emdash, etc that's absurd to identify. Just like weeks ago, I shared how I worked with LLM consultants.
So, many colleges or grad employer in the US never checked applicants writing through AI detector. The UK and EU might be slightly reluctant against AI, what I've seen Sweden is the most progressive memberstate in terms of AI policy, even taught students how to use it properly.
Whereas in Asia, AI is viewed as a productivity tool rather than a part of society's philosophical life. Many businesses laid off because of AI, yet they're struggle to maintain revenue and efficiency like western counterpart because of this false thought of perception.
