Recruiter reached out directly, expressing interest in my candidacy. I scheduled a 30-minute screening call a few days later. Before starting the interview, the recruiter asked me if I consented to the call being recorded for AI annotation/training purposes. After giving it a little thought, I decided to respectfully decline because having the call recorded, whether it's for AI purposes or not, adds an additional layer of stress that applicants shouldn't have to endure. While I understand AI increases productivity, recruiters should still be able to have some humanity left and actually be in-sync with the moment. Taking notes digitally (e.g., using a Wacom tablet) would be a great alternative; you can digitize the notes and then have AI train on that. Unfortunately, once I told the recruiter I respectfully declined, the rest of the interview call consisted of passive-aggressive jabs at why I declined. Questions like, "Why should we hire you, at an AI company, if you refuse to have yourself recorded for AI annotation purposes?" and "Do you support AI?" really astounded me. I support AI and its applications, and I use AI every day. That being said, people can and should have their own values. If an applicant doesn't feel comfortable being recorded, then a company should respect that. If a company, like Qualified, is more focused on having my voice recorded than the experience I can bring, then this is definitely a company I want no part of.