logo
I lost my job to AI, but then used it to supercharge my search for a new role

I lost my job to AI, but then used it to supercharge my search for a new role

Mark Quinn is the senior director of AI operations for Pearl, an AI search platform for professional services. In a prior role at a startup, the arrival of OpenAI's GPT-4 meant artificial intelligence could do the work of a team he was building. The following has been edited for brevity and clarity.
In my last job, I was at a startup. Before that, I was leading engineering operations at Waymo. It was a 3,000-person organization, a rocket ship all its own. In other words, my career was fairly well established and going well by most indications. So, when the startup came along, it was about this bigger swing and this even bigger opportunity, potentially, to help this company unlock what they were going after.
My main role in that was to lead what was the primary human-in-the-loop operation responsible for supervising and curating the AI.
When I joined, it was already a 500-person strong organization, and I was hired to ramp it to thousands. By all indications, we were doing the job really well. Then GPT-4 came out. After playing with it for just a couple of months, we realized that the bulk of the operation that I was scaling, really the entirety of it, was no longer needed. The technology had simply outpaced itself and the human in the loop.
I then spent my last few months there ramping that operation down and setting up a couple of other AI-related agents to help with things like quality technical writing. Once that was in place, my skills simply weren't needed there.
It was not a super fun moment, and it was very, very bumpy. We had hundreds of people doing this work globally, so we had to figure out how to ramp down those contracts as gracefully as possible to allow these folks to have time to hopefully get into other roles.
On my team of about 10 people, only one person stayed on.
'Info workers beware'
In my career, I'd gone from a place where companies like Waymo, Apple, and Amazon were coming to hire me to being out of a job and unable to get the attention of any company.
This moment is making it such that these great companies now have way more capability and people than they may need. So, you've got a lot of great people that are now having to find their next play, but the next plays are dramatically changing.
When I was hired at the startup, I spent the next four months with my team working tirelessly on basically solving this case and figuring out the right staffing and management model. Then GPT-4 came out, and when I gave it the case, it was an epiphanal moment. It spit out the exact answer — the perfect answer — in 30 seconds, including what we thought were very clever adaptations that had taken us a week to identify.
It not only gave us the answer but also the methods. I just sat there with my jaw in my hand. That was the moment that I thought to myself, "Info workers beware."
My own pivot
After we began to wind down the operation, I started looking around to figure out what my next play would be. I spent about five months conducting my job search the wrong way and getting nowhere.
I remember this moment sitting there, again, with my jaw in my hand, wondering, "What am I doing wrong?"
It came out of that moment of almost desperation, saying, "I've asked everybody else. AI, what do you got?" It came back with more nuance and appreciation than I ever could have imagined. That's when I moved into collaboration mode with AI.
One example was with Google's NotebookLM. When it came out, people had fun with the idea of putting their résumés into it and creating a podcast. I actually found incredible utility in doing that. It's interesting to drop your résumé and your LinkedIn profile into NotebookLM and see what AI makes of your career. What does it call out as the highlights?
When I did this, I realized that there were great things about my background and experiences that I wasn't telling people because I didn't see or appreciate them, but this podcast called them out.
Before using AI, I wrote a nice cover letter, updated my résumé, and started looking around on LinkedIn and applying. I was using my network, casting the line. I wasn't just in a corner quietly hoping something would come to me, but it was the traditional approach of, "Here's the résumé that I made for every job. Here's a cover letter with a few tweaks." I was essentially cold applying and trying to hit people up on LinkedIn.
Most people have probably heard that you should tailor your résumé, cover letter, or communications for a role. But that's hard when you're in the grind and just trying to get a job. You've already applied to a bunch, and you're tired and don't want to stare at the same words again and again. This is where AI is extremely helpful.
I also created what I called JobHunt GPT. Now I've turned it into CareerBuddy GPT, but JobHunt GPT was what came out of all this exploration. In my case, it was a custom GPT that understood my background, where I was trying to go, and the history of the jobs I'd applied for. So, I was able to go to it and say, "Hey, here's a new job. Can you assess my candidacy for this?"
The first thing I get is an objective review of how I mesh up against a role. Then, I can say, "Alright, pick apart my résumé. What do I need to adjust?" It can generate the updated résumé, focusing on the things that are important for the role. And it can write the cover letter and identify the key people for me to reach out to. It's essentially like lead analysis and lead development.
My advice to anybody else would be, don't wait five months to figure out the right way to do it. The world has changed. This applies to anything, but especially if you're looking for a job, you have to leverage the most powerful tool available, which is AI.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

OpenAI 前工程師爆料!快速而靈活有如舊日 Facebook?極速擴張而來的代價
OpenAI 前工程師爆料!快速而靈活有如舊日 Facebook?極速擴張而來的代價

Yahoo

time4 hours ago

  • Yahoo

OpenAI 前工程師爆料!快速而靈活有如舊日 Facebook?極速擴張而來的代價

(FILES) This file photo taken on January 23, 2023 in Toulouse, southwestern France, shows screens displaying the logos of OpenAI and ChatGPT. - Search giant Baidu's lacklustre unveiling of its chatbot exposed gaps in China's race to rival ChatGPT, as censorship and a US squeeze on chip imports have hamstrung the country's artificial intelligence ambitions. (Photo by Lionel BONAVENTURE / AFP) / NO USE AFTER APRIL 19, 2023 16:00:00 GMT - TO GO WITH "CHINA-TECHNOLOGY-AI-SOFTWARE", FOCUS BY POORNIMA WEERASEKARA & SEBASTIEN RICCI - To go with "China-technology-AI-software", FOCUS by Poornima Weerasekara & Sebastien Ricci OpenAI 在極短時期內走紅並持續擴張,成為科技界灸手可熱的公司,但在惹人艷羨背後,公司內部文化到底是如何演化呢?曾在 OpenAI 工作一年的 Calvin French-Owen 日前發表了一篇詳細的部落格文章,揭露了這家 AI 巨頭公司內部的真實工作環境。French-Owen 曾參與開發 AI 編程助手 Codex,用以與 Cursor 和 Anthropic 的 Claude Code 競爭的新產品。 French-Owen 在文章中透露,OpenAI 在他工作的一年內從 1,000 人快速擴張至 3,000 人。這種驚人的增長速度反映了 ChatGPT 作為史上增長最快消費產品的地位,該平台在今年三月時已擁有超過 5 億活躍用戶並持續快速增長。 有趣的是,OpenAI 員工極度依賴網路協作工具 Slack 來互相溝通,與 Meta 當年仍然名為 Facebook 時期相似,有著 Move Fast and Break Things(高速衝刺,敢於破格)的特性,實際上 OpenAI 也有不少員工是由 Meta 轉投過去。 然而,如此快速的擴張也帶來了巨大挑戰。French-Owen 坦言:「當你擴張得如此之快時,一切都會出問題:公司內部溝通方式、匯報結構、產品發布流程、人員管理和組織方式、招聘流程等等」。這種混亂狀態在公司的技術架構中也有所體現,多個團隊經常重複開發相同功能,他舉例說:「我見過至少六個不同的隊列管理或代理循環庫。 OpenAI Codex 儘管規模已經相當龐大,OpenAI 仍然保持著小型創業公司的靈活性。員工能夠在幾乎沒有繁文縟節的情況下實現自己的想法。French-Owen 描述了他所在的高級團隊如何在僅僅七週內完成 Codex 的開發和發布,團隊包括大約八名工程師、四名研究員、兩名設計師、兩名市場推廣人員和一名產品經理,整個過程幾乎沒有休息。 然而,這種快速發展模式也產生了技術債務。公司的核心代碼庫被形容為「有點像垃圾場」,因為團隊成員的編程技能差異很大,從能夠處理十億用戶的資深 Google 工程師,到缺乏實際編程經驗的新晉博士都有。 作為備受關注的公司,OpenAI 發展出了高度保密的企業文化,試圖防止信息洩露到公眾。同時,公司密切關注 X(前 Twitter)平台上的動態,如果某個帖子病毒式傳播,OpenAI 會看到並可能做出回應。French-Owen 引用朋友的話說:「這家公司跟著 Twitter 的風向運行」。 針對外界對 OpenAI AI 安全承諾的質疑,French-Owen 認為這是對公司最大的誤解[1]。他指出,雖然有些人擔心理論上對人類的風險,但公司內部更關注實際的安全問題,如「仇恨言論、濫用、操縱政治偏見、製造生物武器、自我傷害、提詞攻擊」等。 OpenAI 並非忽視長期潛在影響,公司有研究人員專門研究這些問題,並且清楚意識到數億人正在使用其大語言模型獲取從醫療建議到心理治療等各種服務。 儘管工作環境充滿挑戰,French-Owen 對產品發布時的效果感到驚嘆。他描述 Codex 上線時的情況:「我從未見過一個產品僅僅是出現在左側邊欄就能獲得如此多的即時用戶增長,但這就是 ChatGPT 的力量」。 French-Owen 強調他的離職並非因為任何「內部糾紛」,而是希望重新回到創業者的角色。他是客戶數據初創公司 Segment 的聯合創始人,該公司於 2020 年被 Twilio 以 32 億美元收購。 更多內容: A former OpenAI engineer describes what it's really like to work there 介紹 Codex 緊貼最新科技資訊、網購優惠,追隨 Yahoo Tech 各大社交平台! 🎉📱 Tech Facebook: 🎉📱 Tech Instagram: 🎉📱 Tech WhatsApp 社群: 🎉📱 Tech WhatsApp 頻道: 🎉📱 Tech Telegram 頻道:

New Windsurf CEO Jeff Wang recounts a frantic weekend of dealmaking to save the startup: 'I was on the verge of tears'
New Windsurf CEO Jeff Wang recounts a frantic weekend of dealmaking to save the startup: 'I was on the verge of tears'

Business Insider

time5 hours ago

  • Business Insider

New Windsurf CEO Jeff Wang recounts a frantic weekend of dealmaking to save the startup: 'I was on the verge of tears'

In the ultra-competitive world of artificial intelligence, dealmaking sometimes must be a frantic, around-the-clock affair. The recent deal between AI startup Windsurf and Cognition, which took place over a single weekend sprint, was no exception. To sum it up: The industry's most successful AI startup, OpenAI, was initially set to acquire Windsurf, which makes an AI coding assistant, in a $3 billion deal. But the deal fell through, and Google swooped in to hire away its CEO and some of its top executives. That left the company's remaining executives scrambling to figure out what to do next and to break the news to the company's 250 employees, who were anticipating a windfall from the OpenAI deal. "It was my job to explain to the company our path forward," Windsurf's new CEO, Jeff Wang, wrote in a post on X. Wang was formerly the company's head of business. He had planned to discuss the options — fundraising from VCs, selling the company to someone else, distributing remaining cash, or just keeping it going. "The mood was very bleak," Wang wrote. "Some people were upset about financial outcomes or colleagues leaving, while others were worried about the future. A few were in tears." Later that day, a ray of light emerged. Wang said Cognition cofounder Scott Wu, and its president, Russell Kaplan, reached out. They wanted what was left of Windsurf. Cognition makes the AI coding agent Devin, which it calls "the first AI software engineer." It is valued at $4 billion, coming off a $120 million funding round in March, according to PitchBook. Wang saw the melding of the company's products as a potential win-win. "Devin would benefit from a foreground synchronous agent, while we needed a remote asynchronous agent," he wrote. Added to that, he was excited about both companies sharing talent. The dealmaking kicked off immediately. They brought in lawyers and spent all weekend hashing it out. In just over 24 hours, they had signed a letter of intent, the first step. A key part of the deal was prioritizing Windsurf employees — ensuring payouts, waiving cliffs, and accelerating equity vesting, Wang said. Lawyers pored over the deal all day Sunday, and by Monday morning, it was finalized. One lawyer called the deal "one of the fastest" they had ever seen, Wang wrote. When the deal was at last announced to Windsurf's employees Monday morning, Wang said they celebrated. "The applause from our people seemed to last forever, and I was on the verge of tears myself," Wang said.

OpenAI just won gold at the world's most prestigious math competition. Here's why that's a big deal.
OpenAI just won gold at the world's most prestigious math competition. Here's why that's a big deal.

Business Insider

time9 hours ago

  • Business Insider

OpenAI just won gold at the world's most prestigious math competition. Here's why that's a big deal.

OpenAI's latest experimental model is a math whiz, performing so well on an insanely difficult math exam that everyone's now talking about it. "I'm excited to share that our latest @OpenAI experimental reasoning LLM has achieved a longstanding grand challenge in AI: gold medal-level performance on the world's most prestigious math competition — the International Math Olympiad (IMO)," Alexander Wei, a member of OpenAI's technical staff, said on X. The International Math Olympiad is a global competition that began in 1959 in Romania and is now considered one of the hardest in the world. It's divided into two days, during which participants are given a four-and-a-half-hour exam, each with three questions. Some famous winners include Grigori Perelman, who helped advance geometry, and Terence Tao, recipient of the Fields Medal, the highest honor in mathematics. In June, Tao predicted on Lex Fridman's podcast that AI would not score high on the IMO. He suggested researchers shoot a bit lower. "There are smaller competitions. There are competitions where the answer is a number rather than a long-form proof," he said. Yet OpenAI's latest model solved five out of six of the problems correctly, working under the same testing conditions as humans, Wei said. Wei's colleague, Noam Brown, said the model displayed a new level of endurance during the exam. "IMO problems demand a new level of sustained creative thinking compared to past benchmarks," he said. "This model thinks for a long time." Wei said the model is an upgrade in general intelligence. The model's performance is "breaking new ground in general-purpose reinforcement learning," he said. DeepMind's AlphaGeometry, by contrast, is specifically designed just to do math. "This is an LLM doing math and not a specific formal math system; it is part of our main push towards general intelligence," Altman said on X. "When we first started openai, this was a dream but not one that felt very realistic to us; it is a significant marker of how far AI has come over the past decade," Altman wrote, referring to the model's performance at IOM. Altman added that a model with a "gold level of capability" will not be available to the public for "many months." The achievement is an example of how fast the technology is developing. Just last year, "AI labs were using grade school math" to evaluate models, Brown said. And tech billionaire Peter Thiel said last year it would take at least another three years before AI could solve US Math Olympiad problems. Still, there are always skeptics. Gary Marcus, a well-known critic of AI hype, called the model's performance "genuinely impressive" on X. But he also posed several questions about how the model was trained, the scope of its "general intelligence," the utility for the general population, and the cost per problem. Marcus also said that the IMO has not independently verified these results.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store