41–45 of 45 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've heard that text-davinci-003 is better than ChatGPT at most tasks. They're probably using that.
is there a competing open-source version of this model I could run locally?
A quick google search reveals GPT-Neo and GPT-J as being open source. But haven't yet tried them, so can't vouch if they're as good.
Neat idea, and congratulations on getting this far! But, execution leaves a lot to be desired.
The UI could use some work. It's not clear what you're supposed to click on, in what order, to go through the whole process. Yes, it's not really that hard, and I figured it out by trial an error (as hackers/developers do), but the average person will probably get lost two minutes in. But that's just a UI problem, which should be relatively easy to improve.
Some of the prompts/labels are confusing. One of the input fields has a placeholder "Write your question here..." Not sure what that is supposed to mean, when it seems to be asking for what I did at a company. It started out saying something else, but I can't get that original message to show now.
As to the results: Sentences that include pronouns are problematic. Can you reliably match a name to a pronoun? Sure, most of the time you'll get it right, and when you fail the user can change "he" to "she" or vice-versa. These problems might seem small, but when you have several of them, you end up with a result that needs lots of editing. And what happens when the user forgets to change "he" to "she" in one place before submitting their resume? I'm assuming people using this product will not be very detail oriented, and if you are generating problems, they might not catch all those problems.
I gave it "Worked with the owners of the ocmpany [typo intentional] to develop their website and make it easier for clients to contact us" and it generated "and book services. Developed a custom website using HTML, CSS, and JavaScript. Optimized the website for mobile devices and improved the overall user experience."
The first "sentence" it produced isn't even a sentence. The second sentence assumed JavasScript which, while in the skillset I provided earlier, doesn't necessarily mean I used it in that project. The third sentence assumed I optimized the website for mobile devices, which I never wrote anywhere.
I saw how it fixed some of my (intentional) typos and poor spelling (html instead of HTML, etc.), which is good. I see how it synthesizes statements of what I did based on the skills I provided. But I just don't see the whole thing coming together well enough, except for people who have absolutely no ability to put together a resume. And do I really want somebody like that working for me?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would also appreciate if you give the ability to upload a PDF directly for resume.
Hey, that's a great idea. Basically: - upload a version of an existing PDF resume - let the tool help you expand on it - download a - hopefully - more satisfying version of your resume did I get the gist of it right? I will definitely add it to our roadmap.
Great idea! But how are you guys planning to pay for the APIs? I was playing around with it and one day just used up all my credits. I will share it with a friend of mine who provdies resume writing service
Thanks for checking it out. Right now we're trying to see if the product, in its very early stages, appeals to anyone. If they'll use it, come back to it, etc. Then we'll most likely pay for the APIs. And think of monetisation and where we'd want to go with this. That being said, are there any features you're keen on? anything you'd like to see that'll help you in your day to day?
Assume everything here is constructive criticism. First, I don't think it's even possible to automate this process to the point where it mostly produces something better than the human could, most of the time. But let's forge ahead anyway... Neat idea, and congratulations on getting this far! But, execution leaves a lot to be desired. The UI could use some work. It's not clear what you're supposed to click on, in wha…
Thanks for the detailed feedback. Some of the issues you highlighted we've known about since we've dog-fooded the app ourselves. It's interesting to see others mention them as things that don't help the whole thing come together. Some of those are new - especially related to the UI.
But each of them is now a ticket we'll work on to improve in the coming days and weeks.
Once again, thanks for taking the time to write such a thoughtful review.