Hey, I'm the author of the blog post. Thank you for submitting this. If you have any questions feel free to ask and please let me know how the writing was. It's one of my first posts so I'd like to improve
Thank you for your service
I gave the AI arms and legs then it rejected me
161–170 of 419 posts
Re: I gave the AI arms and legs then it rejected me
#162On the electron part, it's common to (ironically) not support Linux. There are pretty annoying bugs with windows management (window will stay stuck in the background), build process are always OS specific, etc. So often not worth the maintainance.
For generic consumer products, sure, but for dev & technical power user tools the audience is big enough that these arguments doesn't hold water. Stack Overflow's latest survey shows nearly 30% of professional devs using Ubuntu specifically (https://survey.stackoverflow.co/2025/technology#1-computer-o...) and my own metrics (building a cross-platform dev desktop app with a global dev/technical user base) show pretty similar numbers: 65% windows, 20% Mac, 15% Linux. I would expect there's a significant (comfortably above 10%) Linux user base within the claude computer use audience.
The practical reality of distributing is mildly complicated, but there's now lots of good cross-distro options, and not having to deal with code signing everything makes some parts much easier than Mac & Windows. Ignoring that many users is fair enough for a startup or first MVP, but quite surprising for a company at Anthropic's level.
Re: I gave the AI arms and legs then it rejected me
#163Reminds me of the guy who created Homebrew being rejected by Google for failing some silly Leetcode puzzle.
Homebrew is “just” a package manager, not the core of part of Google. They could rip it out overnight and won’t even notice it. And Google gave him a fair shot. This guy got rejected by some automated system without even interview.
> Homebrew is “just” a package manager, not the core of part of Google.
Yes, this. Sometimes I wonder if those coming up with the Homebrew example have any experience whatsoever with software development. I mean, sure the project is popular and surely doesn't hurt on a resume. But does it showcase any level of technical expertise or mastery? No, I'm afraid not. I would bet that the majority of software engineers would be able to put together an equivalent system in a week or so. Think about it, and pay attention to what are the system's usecases. It's hardly rocket science.
Re: I gave the AI arms and legs then it rejected me
#164Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is an incredibly short-term thinking. The reason is simple: the author is not obliged to continue while this sort of thing can be demoralizing. I don't know about the author's approach to this matter, but if I would find out that a company is making a killing using my software and then that company would refuse to even give me an interview I'd probably stop loving doing what I do. Sure, the software is under MIT…
Is it short term? Seems like the MS and the others got exactly what they wanted. Exploiting the passion for free work is a trade that will keep happening as long as there are passionate inexperienced people.
Sorry but have to call b.s. here. Many of us did in fact, in this very forum, kept pointing out that dumping on GPL (and the man and his ideas behind it) was a mistake and that non-gpl oss was for chumps. And we were greyed to oblivion. Same exact story as with surveillance tech.
Hackernews is hugely responsible for many of the ailments of this field in 21st century. Own it.
Re: I gave the AI arms and legs then it rejected me
#165Earlier quoted context omitted.
you're right about MIT vs GPL confusion. people brainwashed themselves into thinking MIT is "more open", because it's more permissive, but it lets others profit off your code without contributing back. GPL makes them share or pay to relicense, since you own the copyright. with MIT, they don’t need to ask. MIT just benefits big corps. GPL better protects the open-source spirit, and paradoxically, the ownership of your…
And yes, people being able to use your code for whatever they want is absolutely more open than having restrictions on how/who gets to use it. One other model that can also work well is to dual license as GPL + commercial, so people who want to publish their work can use the GPL license but you can potentially fund the project from license sales to closed source users using the commercial licensing option. I see this…
Why would it be unfeasible to just share the code parts that are GPL?
Re: I gave the AI arms and legs then it rejected me
#166Earlier quoted context omitted.
The flip side is that if they can technically pull that off then the cost of writing the library has dropped so low that an OSS maintainer probably wouldn't have to work too hard to write it anyway.
Being able to rewrite existing working code sufficient to copyright-launder it isn't the same as being able to write it from scratch, unfortunately, especially since LLMs seem to be allowed to ignore quite a bit of copyright law with complete impunity. Imo it's totally plausible that something will be expensive & time consuming to create, even with LLMs, but still easy to fork outside current licensing restrictions w…
[deleted]
Re: I gave the AI arms and legs then it rejected me
#167Everyone is suggesting that AI rejected this candidate but that brings up two points:
1) Is the hiring AI so incompetent that it did not realize it had a "S-tier pull" in the process and should have immediately prioritized the find?
2) Was the candidate's submission so bad that a reviewing AI couldn't even tell the massive relevance he had to their work?
I suppose, alternatively, Anthropic could just not really care about Claude Desktop enough to hire a specialist for one part of the stack. Perhaps they're looking for much more "full stack AI" who can do a lot. They have 350-400 total engineers, is that enough to hire a specialist for Claude Desktop?
I guess my question is: Did the AI fail, did the candidate fail, or did the AI work well and we just don't know the criteria it was succeeding in using.
Re: I gave the AI arms and legs then it rejected me
#168The author should have just asked the friend of a friend for a warm intro instead of trying to go through the main gate. Sucks, but that's the reality of hiring (and getting hired) in tech in general.
Was wondering something similar, if OP had blogged it earlier when he found claude was using it and re-posted it in HN/reddit it in a sensational way to capture eyes. Maybe through one of the forums he could have got an introduction and a job doing what he loves.
OP still has a chance now, maybe not anthropic, even other competitors can come knocking.
Re: I gave the AI arms and legs then it rejected me
#169Dude they did not reject they did not even SEE you because they likely have 10k application per week.
Just ask your friend for an intro.
Re: I gave the AI arms and legs then it rejected me
#170Unfortunately, this seems on par with recruitment practices in the summer of 2025. I can almost guarantee that they didn't even read that application / cover letter and auto-magically rejected it. "the team doesn't have the capacity to review additional applications" Zero effort. They probably didn't even realize the relevance of that specific application for that role. Unbelievable, I swear!
Tbf, I'd rather get a "we didn't review your CV" response than a template "we are continuing with other candidates :)" response. It softens the blow considerably and helps me as an applicant better keep track on which variation of the CV is working best because I can just remove this datapoint.
> Tbf, I'd rather get a "we didn't review your CV" response than a template "we are continuing with other candidates :)" response.
Idk it sounds plausible that OP might just have been late to the party, and applied when the recruitment process was at the final stages.