radug14

8 ms·

1.
by radug14 11mo ago
This is a super tough, but incredibly valuable thread. Thank you all for the raw feedback. I need to be clear: I 100% agree with the core sentiment here. As a candidate, the hiring process is often broken, dehumanising, and feels like a one
2.
by radug14 11mo ago
Absolutely, you can solve the challenge in any way you like. You can use AI, StackOverflow, or a friend you have in the room.
3.
by radug14 11mo ago
If they do what you said, they will have no way to actually differentiate between candidates so they will waste their time and money on using my platform. Doing screening calls asynchronously doesn't open the floodgates.
4.
by radug14 11mo ago
There is no AI judge.
5.
by radug14 11mo ago
And is that not how hiring works today, or are we pretending that hiring processes are completely fair and non-biased? How many companies still ask for take-home exercises?
6.
by radug14 11mo ago
To your other replies, again, this is a screening interview. It aims to assess, in a short time, how you approach a day to day coding problem. It's not about specialised technical requirements - for that you jump on a dedicated technic
7.
by radug14 11mo ago
Yes. Niju is not meant to be your first interaction with the company. You first speak to the hiring manager and only then you proceed to this stage.
8.
by radug14 11mo ago
The challenges are designed for an average engineer at the job opening level (junior, mid, senior) to solve in approximately 10 minutes. Furthermore, they are practical day-to-day tasks that should not put pressure just by nature of what&#x
9.
by radug14 11mo ago
Again I want to make it clear that the AI is not driving any decisions, it just summarizes some data points. The technical screening call typically happens after an initial screening chat with HR or the hiring manager. The tech screening in
10.
by radug14 11mo ago
I agree and I would never use AI to properly interview someone. This is a screening interview. It's at the top of the recruitment funnel. The alternative is seeing fewer candidates (because you can't have engineers do non-stop int
11.
by radug14 11mo ago
Your time is definitely not worth less than the company you are applying to. And I 100% agree interviews should not be offloaded to AI. This is a screening interview, and the AI component simply assists the hiring manager, it does not autom
12.
by radug14 11mo ago
I understand and agree, but this is a technical screening. Typically you would have someone from HR have an initial conversation with the applicant to align. This comes after, if it's a go from both parties. Furthermore, Niju does not
13.
by radug14 11mo ago
Hey! I think it's quite the opposite, and I'll explain why. Let me just apply one example. A few years ago I was screening candidates over a 30-minute live coding interview covering pretty day to day stuff. That required a 30 minu
14.
by radug14 11mo ago
May I ask why? I would never approve the use of async interviews further down the pipeline, but for screening purposes (from a candidate POV) I personally don't have any problems. Keen to hear your point of view!
15.
by radug14 11mo ago
Hi everyone, I’m Radu. In my personal experience, screening software engineers has always put pressure on internal engineering teams. Over the years, I’ve tried different approaches to streamline the process, but nothing has really fixed th
16.
Show HN: I was tired of wasting engineer time on screening calls so I built Niju(niju.dev)
14 points by radug14 11mo ago|44 comments