I'll just make an AI of myself and let them two have a solid 15 minutes of conversation.
1 month ago | 3
Dystopian if a company can’t spend the time to talk to you but is happy to waste yours
1 month ago | 0
Oh gawd, pivot hell is a nightmare. I think every person who’ve ever stuck with building a startup for more than a year will go through this once or twice, if not more.
1 month ago | 0
Truthfully i'm not a fan of AI recruiters, but if companies are willing to pay it's a W for you. Good luck!
1 month ago | 0
You're on the right track dude, don't worry too much. Your thesis is right - I would be happy to atleast know that my application has been acknowledged and would be ok if I know that someone else who was better than me was hired for the role than being ghosted
1 month ago (edited)
| 0
I really wonder how you gonna deal with the hallucinations. I often use chatgtp to help me with language learning and it starts hallucinating like crazy after just 10 messages. Like, it says that my answer was incorrect because of the thing which doesn’t exist and as a correct answer it uses the exact same sentence. And I learn freaking English, I can’t imagine an easier thing for a LLM. Can imagine it’s a bit crucial to not to have such possibility in a tech interview. Ofc you can just start a new dialogue every answer, but then Idk how it’s different from the a normal ass testing.
1 month ago (edited) | 0
The current interview process is archaic. Ai ability to quickly articulate who a person really is could be powerful. It could also go both ways and truly help the candidate "interview" the company to see if it's a good fit for them. Please keep going.
1 month ago (edited) | 1
The world doesn't need another filter to make candidates waste more time in the interviewing process with AI.
1 month ago | 0
Ai interviewer is a much more efficient way to increase chances to get hired, as well as chose a better candidate. I like the idea, and it’s the future. Candidates might even feel more secure and open to be interviewed by ai at first — especially if they could choose whether to send it, or start it over and try again I’ve been developing similar idea for branding discovery sessions. Async chat with ai assistant guiding the client to uncover the idea, vision of the founds, and their whole POV. That would help decrease time and friction of the branding process especially for SMEs — they usually not fans of long strategy sessions and zoom calls and arguably allergic to long pitchdecks. With async ai discovery, they could approach session in comfortable way and setting — whenever and wherever they please. Especially because most people are better at texting and thinking over deep stuff on their own.
1 month ago | 0
I also taught about building a recruiter ai 3-4 months ago but I couldn't do it because I can't scrape off from LinkedIn because they can sue me but you will succeed just the only thing left to do in your ai is marketing it
1 month ago | 0
Don’t search for approval in the internet. Build what you find useful. Your customer are not the devs, because we usually hate interviewers in general. Your customer is someone else, the HR guy, the company.
1 month ago | 0
It’s a great idea and I can definitely see companies using it to further root out candidates. I’d prefer this over handing in a piece of paper since you get to sell yourself like you said. I feel like a lot of people are worried about the ai rejecting them before ever getting to a human. Would the AI interview work along with your resume almost as a cover letter and would still then all be looked over and reviewed by the company or would the AI be able to completely reject a candidate based off the interview alone.
1 month ago | 1
This just makes it harder for people to find a role because they have even less of a chance at showing who they are in front of a real human being. People who have a different accent, people who get nervous or struggle with interviews would automatically get filtered out much earlier. I call BS on "a human interview would definitely still come afterwards". This entrenches the bias towards those already privileged by the current system of hiring, people from the dominant groups in tech.
1 month ago | 0
Honest review. Just did an AI interview last night. It doesn't let you pause between sentences. A couple of seconds of silence and it immediately cuts you off and goes on a tangent. A human can understand when the other person is thinking, not AI. It was quite honestly the most frustrating call I've had in my life. If you can fix this you have my support
1 month ago | 2
At the end of the day these types of solutions are trying to augment the human to human interactions. This is a very hard thing to do. imo impossible. Not to say that some tools can’t help in some areas. This is an incredibly crowded space. For example Karat has taken a novel approach to this for years. And now introducing AI into their stack. What I have been seeing more and more are that companies are just spinning up their own homegrown solution for hiring because everyone wants to assess differently. And that’s because you are dealing with human emotions and gut feelings.
1 month ago (edited) | 0
The problem is that now you have to talk to an AI for 10-15, pray it understands you correctly and then be rejected because things were lost in translation, and now you wasted more time because a machine hallucinated what you said. That's very demoralising.
1 month ago | 2
Hey I've received about 2-3 AI interview invites throughout my job hunting journey over the past 2-3 month, My opinion is that whenever I see this my hindsight thought is multiple of the following 1. Did they actually invite me because they generally believe my background & experience aligned. 2. Since they use AI interviewing are they sending it to more candidates which means maybe they'll not even review all of the AI interview that was done. 3. If the company side still need to review the interview at the end of the day why not just commit the time to actually interviewing the candidate? I think most candidate probably dont see this as a win, it's similiar to company just throwing OA to all the candidates and then rejecting them even if they score pretty well (there's no clarity) but ofc this space of B2B probably has a good amount of gains. What do you think?
1 month ago | 0
I would agree it’s a good idea. However I would want ATS retired tho. The interview process could look like this. The recruiter spends time with the AI telling them what they are looking for, therefore clarify metrics that the candidates will be measured against. Then the Ai recruiter can interview thousands of candidates. The Ai recruiter can then give a summary report to the recruiter on which candidates scored the highest. But all this is dependent on how absolutely clear the recruiter is on what they want. Otherwise it’s just a more fancier version of ATS and becomes a roadblock.
1 month ago | 1
Just curious, what is the main problem you’re trying to solve? My understanding is: candidate pool is large, companies need efficient and effective way to narrow down candidate pool. What are some insights you get from an AI interview that you wouldn’t get from, say, asking them to record a few verbal answers to some pre-written questions? Or, perhaps AI-personalized questions based on their resume. Basically: what benefits do you get that outweigh the friction of having to do a 10-15 minute interview with an AI? Just trying to understand better. Thanks for being so transparent!
1 month ago | 1
Have you had to call customer service to setup your router or fix a billing mistake only to genuinely spend 15 painful minutes being gate kept by an AI that says either (1) you dont have the problem you do according to the recording, (2) ill get right on that only for it to not fix a thing and repeat itself, (3) hang up the call early, or (4) redirect you to a real human only for the system to connect you to another AI? Now, imagine this in the middle of you and paying to put food on your table. No thank you. Just because AI can be put in a pipeline doesnt mean the middleman made the service better. If history is any indicator, middlemen end up being parasitic to both sides of the pipeline.
1 month ago | 1
Your Average Tech Bro
My latest video I talked about the latest pivot I'm making for my startup and it was definitely quite the controversial video. TLDR is that I'm creating an AI recruiter such that when a candidate applies to a job they hop on a quick 10-15min interview with an AI interviewer where they talk more about their experience/sell themselves to the company more. There were LOTS of opinions in my comments about how some people don't love the idea of an AI interviewer, but I'm genuinely curious to hear more thoughts from you all because there is a bit of a disconnect in my brain about the negative reaction towards it.
On one hand I understand the perspective that AI interviewing sucks/can be seen as a "de-humanizing recruiting experience" but my devil's advocate POV is that this allows candidates to speak about themselves/vouch for themselves beyond just a simple resume screen which is, imo, the most extreme case of a de-humanizing job application experience. One single piece of paper to determine whether you get an in person interview or not is a crazy concept that is very much so the norm today. Yes, in an ideal world every single candidate would get an in person interview but if a company gets 1000+ applications per job listing (which is not uncommon) this is legit impossible to do. Not trying to be very defensive I'm just very curious to hear your thoughts! I understand that this would be a really bad solution if it completely got rid of ever human interview experience, but isn't being able to vouch for yourself/sell your story in a 10-15min AI interview better than just uploading your resume and never hearing back again? This would be just be one part of the interview process — a human interview would definitely still come afterwards.
Genuinely curious to hear your thoughts on this because in my opinion this is a win for the candidate, particularly non traditional candidates who may not look "great" on paper but have all the skills to be a great fit for the job.
1 month ago | [YT] | 35