Hacker News Reader

Comment by yawnxyz | Hacker News Reader

This is kind of cool, but there are NO affordances. It's like you walk into a restaurant and you have to ask the waiter exactly what food they have, and they'll answer your question, but you never know if you they gave you the breadth of what the restaurant serves. Frustrating!

Better if you had a snapshot of what's on offer, and then you could ask a special thing (does this dish contain nuts; I'm allergic) etc. — similarly, would be nice to have a small snapshot of the work, and then I could ask what specifically a person did on a project, see some demos / github, etc

View on HN

Great callout. I don't actually see this replacing LinkedIn profiles or resumes, more like an add-on so you can figure out more about a person. Example: "Proficient in C++", that's about as much as you get from a resume. But what projects did I use C++ in? What tooling did I use? Did it ship in a product?

Better yet, the interactive profile should say 'yes, they worked on C++ on these projects, here's a link to the specific github project'.

Eventually, if this turns out to actually be a good idea and gain traction, I'd want to build recruiter/candidate matching tools that let you just ask 'I need someone who's worked on Raytracing Shader Compilers before'. Something very narrow and specialized and it should still be able to bring up the 50 people in the world who have that intersection, then you can ask those people's profiles for more about their experience.

Other crazy idea: The resume and linked in profiles are like the table of contents of your career. Why do I have to write the table of contents and not just generate from my append-only work history. The table of contents of documents are generated, why is my resume not generated from something persistent instead.

It's very similar to how the entertainment industry works. A director can specify a broad range of qualifications and search an actor database for potential matching candidates.

The biggest issues I see are:

- getting candidates to put their data in, you can't really rely on scraping because a résumé doesn't provide enough information, and your hallucination quantity will go up

- getting critical mass of users, so that recruiters and potential employers would find the database valuable

- candidates embellishing their accomplishments, though admittedly this is also a problem with basic resumes

I think OP has solved some of those issues with this approach. Initially, this is a fun tool that provides value to individuals. The result at scale becomes extremely valuable. The biggest missing piece is verification of skillset. I'm not sure how to solve that. Current employers? Motivated to keep their top performers and little incentive to engage early on. Peers are easy to game and are susceptible to generative AI for automation. You would almost need to integrate some kind of in person meeting for verification. Establish known experts and have them review and verify, then feed that into employer feedback after hiring for a sort of credit system. Employers using the rating system would themselves need to be monitored and policed.

This was a fun one to think about. The secret is in where this link is posted. I was thinking through domain name verification and realized that if employers trust LinkedIn, and you can put this link onto your LinkedIn, it inherits that trust.

So basically, if you link it on your resume/LinkedIn, then the consumer of your AI profile should be able to have the same base level of trust in it.

As for the candidate themselves lying, well, you can always do that. In this case, you can actually verify it better than just having to trust a candidate in the moment in an interview. I see these interactive profiles as a way to actually build more trust and credibility between people by giving everyone more to cross-reference.

The candidate gets to be remembered and have the details of their skills and accomplishments shown, the employers get to select with more precision and make valuable interview time even more value dense by having a better/more informed starting point.

Dealing with hallucinations was really finicky. I think I have a way to prevent that now though and ultimately give you control. 'Document search' style things always hallucinated for me so I needed something else. I made another comment on dealing with that but let me know if you have more questions.

The critical mass of users was a weird one to think about yeah. I had two choices, go with breadth first tools (e.g. recruiter tools), or depth first tools (e.g. individual tools to 'market yourself' or just network). I went with the latter first because it would provide value to a single person, just like how my test profile here is providing value to me right now; I didn't want to have to rely on critical mass.

You should ask the LLM what the topmost relevant things would be to put on the homepage.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com