Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

HackerRank open sourced its ATS. My resume scored 90/100. Oh wait 74. No – 88

danunparsed.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 463 posts

Re: HackerRank open sourced its ATS. My resume scored 90/100. Oh wait 74. No – 88

#11

Post by adrianN »

dc3k wrote: post #3

Disregarding the fact that this thing is completely broken, its grading rubric is ridiculous to begin with (as was mentioned in the article itself, but I must reiterate how completely stupid this is): > 35 points for open source contributions > 30 for personal projects I don't contribute to open source or have personal projects because I don't spend my free time doing what I do 40 hours a week to make a living. My 15…

They are selecting for people who are fine working in their free time. If you contribute to open source you are more likely to contribute to the company on weekends. If instead you have other hobbies or a family that takes up non-work hours you are more likely to drop your pen after forty hours.

Re: HackerRank open sourced its ATS. My resume scored 90/100. Oh wait 74. No – 88

#14

Post by small_scombrus »

bluechair wrote: post #10
dvt wrote: post #6

An alarming number of people don't understand that LLMs work via purely stochastic processes, so I'm happy to see in-depth pieces like this. I'm looking for a job and maybe this is why it's so hard to get a callback these days: resumes are just dumped in some LLM black hole and no one really knows how it works. The author says: > temperature 0.1 — low, supposedly nudging the model toward deterministic outputs This is…

Willing to be corrected but I believe this type of automated resume filtering is illegal. Not saying it never happens but my understanding is it is not typical.

They don't need to actually filter/blackhole to have have the same virtual effect.

Show someone a list of resumes with an "applicant score*" and they'll naturally ignore the ones with a low ranking

*scores are generated with AI, mistakes may be made, use only as a guide and verify results

Re: HackerRank open sourced its ATS. My resume scored 90/100. Oh wait 74. No – 88

#18

Post by jerrythegerbil »

kyralis wrote: post #5
jerrythegerbil wrote: post #4

> I fail 65% of the time. Same exact resume, different luck. As someone who’s run hiring pipelines for technical roles in the past few years, that’s actually a fantastic number. I objectively hate saying that, but it’s true. 35% chance of elevating a technical individual to the next stage with no effort? I’ve seen as many as 100+ applicants an hour even when including a domain specific screener question. That’s 35 “s…

Is it? Or is it a 65% chance of a resume getting ignored before a single human sees it, reducing your pipeline's likelihood of catching qualified candidates by the same? Gates that reduce resume flow-through are only useful if their reduction is correlated with quality. Otherwise they're just dragging out your hiring process or unnecessarily causing you to ultimately lower your hiring bars.

> Gates that reduce resume flow-through are only useful if their reduction is correlated with quality.

The volume is infeasible to review everyone for quality, even at an hour scale. The conclusion and solution is inevitable, though I wish it were different. 35% is actually really good if you’re not coming in through a referral.

The current reality is <1% and the person reviewing you is exhausted.

Re: HackerRank open sourced its ATS. My resume scored 90/100. Oh wait 74. No – 88

#19

Post by hahahaa »

rkuska wrote: post #16

This reminds me of my former CTO. He would take bunch of CVs and randomly throw some of them in a bin. He didn’t want to work with “unlucky” people.

The problem is with this system he only worked with unlucky people.

Re: HackerRank open sourced its ATS. My resume scored 90/100. Oh wait 74. No – 88

#20

Post by thayne »

bluechair wrote: post #10
dvt wrote: post #6

An alarming number of people don't understand that LLMs work via purely stochastic processes, so I'm happy to see in-depth pieces like this. I'm looking for a job and maybe this is why it's so hard to get a callback these days: resumes are just dumped in some LLM black hole and no one really knows how it works. The author says: > temperature 0.1 — low, supposedly nudging the model toward deterministic outputs This is…

Willing to be corrected but I believe this type of automated resume filtering is illegal. Not saying it never happens but my understanding is it is not typical.

I would expect that to depend on jurisdiction.

I don't know for sure, but I would be surprised if it was illegal in my particular US state. You might be able to argue the AI has inherent biases that introduce illegal discrimination in the hiring process, but my understanding is winning I case like that would be very difficult, especially since most employers are very cagey about their hiring process and why they mades a decision.

Post reply on HN