Yes, AI is used to pre-screen. Then candidates are presented to employers. Doesn’t mean employers are hiring them. There’s 2 issues at play.
Sure, but, as mentioned, if you don't make it past the AI screening, then no one in the employer's HR will even see your resume, and to them it's as if you hadn't even applied. This comes into play when there's a job opening to which a thousand, or hundreds, or even several dozen people apply. Not only are HR unwilling to sort through them, they're generally not even competent to do so at the detailed level. So they rely on Indeed (and others) to pre-filter the resumes and only send to HR those that pass their screening.
That's all I was saying, where it's important to read the job description in great detail and make sure that every "key word" on the job description is present on the resume you submit, even if it's loosely mentioned, where you have a section listing all the technologies you're even somewhat acquainted in or heard about. I'd put a section on the resume that says something like: "Other Technologies to which I've been exposed: A, B, C, D" ... where you would list them by name to match the job description, yet without claiming any degree of proficiency in it. Very rarely does an employer strictly require proficiency in everything on the resume, but the AI is stupid, and we should try to outsmart that nonsense just to make it through that first gate and onto the employer's desk.
That reminds me of a national math exam I took in High School. I was not even in the top 5-10 at my Jesuit High School in math (but was TOWARD the top), with some Oriental kids being math geniuses. Yet after the test results came back, I was the only one at my school who made the cut to the next level of exams, which surprised me because some of these guys were much better than me at math. So I asked around and found out that those dummies did not factor in the scoring system of the exam. We were told ahead of time that you got, say, 3 points for every correct answer, and they deducted 1 point for every incorrect answer, and that the score you needed to make it to the next round was, oh, a 25 (it might vary from year to year but it was generally within a 2-3 point range each year). So I went through the test and answered ONLY the questions I was 100% without a doubt sure of. I found exactly enough of them where it would put me safely above the cutoff range, and everything else I just left blank. Meanwhile, those other guys tried to finish every single question, and got so many of the harder ones wrong that the deductions brought them down to below the threshold. Moral of the story is that sometimes you have to apply a diffent kind of smarts. You might be the best, say, programmer in the United States, but if you can't get your resume past the stupid AI garbage by outsmarting it, then no one will ever know.
So my only point was not to let the AI garbage thwart your job prospects. AI is stupid and can't find nuances like, "well, I don't see the word 'Angular' on this resume, but man this guy has tons of experience that's very similar and he could switch to 'Angular' ... from, say, 'React' (similar tech) in a heartbeat". No, AI is stupid and is looking for the WORD "Angular" ... so put the darn word on your resume, but in such a way that it's not dishonest and you're claiming a degree of proficiency that you don't actually have. That's why I recommend to everyone submitting resumes to just have a summary "Other Technologies" section where you put down pretty much anything you've ever even heard of ... but especially every key word that appears in the job posting.