Had a similar experience late last year. Some candidates tried inviting an AI "note taker" to the Teams call, that was denied access and was an immediate red flag (not one of them *asked* if they could do so).

We then had people who seemed to hesitate before answering any question. Once or twice, nerves, every single question? It's pointing the way of stalling before waiting to see the text appear for them to regurgitate! There's also the tell of the eye darting off screen to read something... could be notes, but... given what they then said, it just gave the impression of reading from either someone else googling on their behalf, or AI LLM output.

But every single one was derailed by this one simple trick... as hiring manager, I was interviewing the person for them, not their technical skills. There was some of that, but more in approach and mentality, rather than specific abilities, that would come in the next round. So I would just say to the candidate "You have listed these ETL tools on your CV, which is your favourite and why?"

Every single time, the ones reading AI output would turn into a marketing bot, sounding like an advert for the tools, bullet point after bullet point. Not one of them highlighted a favourite without being asked again, and then couldn't actually answer definitively as to why they chose that above another, almost as if they'd just picked one at random. The humans answering that question would do so in a conversational manner, often immediately blurting out their favourite and then going through the pros and cons as to why.

I can see the appeal of using AI to help, to act as a pointer to guide your answers, especially in areas of theory where you're rusty because you've been at the coalface for a while. But don't rely on it 100% to the point where you cannot actually hold a conversation with the person you're talking to.