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

141–150 of 463 posts

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

#141

Post by sevenzero »

LinXitoW wrote: post #127
sevenzero wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What a inhumane way of looking at this. Hiring is deeply flawed, you know it, and yet you keep job postings open for weeks/months in case "the one" magically appears on your doorstep instead of just interviewing 10-20 people and just pick one... Corpo bullshittery at its finest.

What's the alternative? Everyones up in arms, but I see ZERO viable alternatives proposed. If you have 1000 applications for every job, and you know that a bunch of these applications are "a bad fit", to put it mildly, you have to filter. And you cannot realistically give every resume a good, human look. By the time HR would be done, the market has already moved on five times. So, what is the real difference between…

>instead of just interviewing 10-20 people and just pick one

Here's a realistic proposition. HR just wants to inflate numbers so that they seem busy looking for the right fit. Keep posting open for 1 week, manually filter for another week, invite people, employ one. Plenty of people with degrees looking for jobs right now, I don't see what's the issue with just trying one. Companies desperately look for the "magic" applicant that checks all boxes, while also trying to pay them almost minimum wage.

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

#142

Post by chrisjj »

miki123211 wrote: post #64
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…

In theory, temperature 0 does make the LLM deterministic. Well, in theory theory, temperature 0 doesn't really exist. Mathematically, as lim temperature->0, the distribution gets spikier and spikier, the most likely sample goes to almost-but-not-quite infinity and the rest go to almost-but-not-quite 0. In practice, temperature=0 is literally a separate branch of an if statement that just picks the most common sample…

> However, due to things such as batching and even different kinds of floating point imprecisions for different algorithm implementations, the probability distribution itself often differs run-by-run

The implementation does not often differ run by run.

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

#143

Post by vidarh »

nok22kon wrote: post #113
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…

its a bad idea in general to use non-1.0 temperature. there is a reason labs are strongly recommending using 1.0. using low temperature is more deterministic, but the cost is the model becomes "dumber"

Plenty of setups defaults to lower values than 1.0.

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

#144

Post by another-dave »

adrianN wrote: post #11
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.

> If you contribute to open source you are more likely to contribute to the company on weekends

I wonder if that assumption is bourne out in reality though?

I'd imagine if someone's OSS contributions are enough of a factor that it's worth hiring them, they're not going to drop it on a whim to work extra hours on the day job.

(Assuming you weed out open source contributions like "I made a todo list app in React but licenced it as MIT" or "I fixed a typo in the docs for NextJS". )

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

#145

Post by zipy124 »

tipsytoad wrote: post #126
nok22kon wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

its a bad idea in general to use non-1.0 temperature. there is a reason labs are strongly recommending using 1.0. using low temperature is more deterministic, but the cost is the model becomes "dumber"

1.0 is actually pretty arbitrary and way too high as a general rule. Something like 0.3 is a more sensible default

It really depends on the application does it not? I'm not an LLM guy, but for creative tasks like storytelling wouldn't you want a higher temperature usually? Happy to gain insight from anyone with experience here :)

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

#146

Post by t-3 »

agnosticmantis wrote: post #97
ryukoposting wrote: post #12

At this point we might as well adopt that joke where you blindly throw away half the resumes because you don't want to hire unlucky people.

A person's total luck is constant over a lifetime. The remaining half of the candidates already spent some of their luck in this selection, so they'll be on average less lucky than the discarded half.

No, luck would be some expression of the difference between the average and the individual outcomes - it only exists relative to a population at the point in time when it is measured.

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

#147

Post by vidarh »

smusamashah wrote: post #61
spwa4 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

We expect computers to be consistent on the other hand. A calculator will always give you the same answer unless some chip gets struck by a particle. LLMs are on computers and should be fairly consistent too.

And this lies at the heart of the problem.

We expect computers to be consistent despite running programs that are not designed to be consistent.

This despite the fact that we have lots of experience of programs running on computers that produces wildly inconsistent outputs.

But for some reason some people choose to assume LLMs should act like a calculator instead of any of those programs.

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

#148

Post by zipy124 »

ryukoposting wrote: post #12

At this point we might as well adopt that joke where you blindly throw away half the resumes because you don't want to hire unlucky people.

Or more to the point. There are generally far more qualified applicants than job roles. That is training and education greatly expanded over the last couple of decades to produce more and more job seekers, whilst job creation hasn't really kept pace.

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

#149

Post by bryanrasmussen »

>If your company’s cutoff sits at 85, I fail 65% of the time. Same exact resume, different luck.

Your resume's reception is always affected by random factors, only now you are able to test, debug and technically critique the randomness.

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

#150

Post by psychoslave »

>You might as well throw out half the resumes and tell the the applicants you don’t fuck with bad luck.

Hmm, well, maybe a bit with a nuance of elite class structure reproduction (that doesn’t prevent a few transclass to showcase in case anyone critic the perfect meritocracy at run), that’s basically what people get, so crude truth but truth nonetheless.

Oh don’t take it personally. Your own bespoke hand-tailored process of course is different, it does give the opportunity to everyone to reach the most accomplished version of themselves beyond what they ever dare to dream.

It won’t help though with the systematic failure of aiming to provide an accessible path to flourish for everyone and letting no one behind.

Again, this is no fault of any specific player, but as long as a majority feel compelled to move within the frame of the game with few winners that merit all they got in contrast to large stock of inept losers, the outcomes are no wonder.

Post reply on HN