HackerRank open sourced its ATS. My resume scored 90/100. Oh wait 74. No – 88
sambellll
160 points
34 comments
June 29, 2026
Related Discussions
Found 5 related stories in 755.4ms across 14,015 title embeddings via pgvector HNSW
- Show HN: OpenHack – OSS security scanner, 40x cheaper, on par with Opus 4.6 ananayarora · 12 pts · June 04, 2026 · 48% similar
- Schema Harness Achieves ~99% on Arc‑AGI‑3 Public jasondavies · 94 pts · July 16, 2026 · 47% similar
- Show HN: We scored 50k PRs with AI – what we learned about code complexity chuboy · 11 pts · March 30, 2026 · 47% similar
- Job application asked for my SAT scores seltzerboys · 125 pts · June 22, 2026 · 46% similar
- Show HN: State of the Art of Coding Models, According to Hacker News Commenters yunusabd · 82 pts · May 02, 2026 · 46% similar
Discussion Highlights (13 comments)
glouwbug
I guess at least HR doesn’t have to read 1,000 resumes. Heck, to be frank, could they make sense of the first 10 resumes?
dc3k
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 years of work experience is worth a maximum of 25%, so any company using this idiotic system would pass on me immediately. Open source and personal projects are fine, but in no sane world are they worth 65% of a resume's score.
jerrythegerbil
> 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 “screened” applicants in an hour. Were valid candidates screened out? Yes. Does you still have a candidate pool 35x larger than you need? Unfortunately, also yes. The volume of applicants is SO HIGH such that your chances of getting moved to the next stage are actually markedly worse if AI isn’t involved. If you didn’t apply immediately (using an AI bot) there’s 50+ people ahead of you, and an exhausted technical leader if they ever make it to your resume. Referral bonuses exist for a reason.
dvt
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 not correct (and is briefly touched on later in the piece when he sets temperature to 0), temperature is not some kind of "deterministic" switch, but rather it affects the sampling distribution (which becomes more "spiky"—but is still very much a distribution).
cyberax
Ah... The AI learned the old HR trick: take 50% of resumes and throw them out without looking. Rationale: "we don't need unlucky losers".
ryukoposting
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.
steve_j_choi
This could be used as a good way to self-evaluate one's current position from the company's point of view. you would tweak prompts and guidelines that are expected from the company and see how you score
rkuska
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.
quink
"A computer can never be held accountable, therefore a computer must never make a management decision."
neya
I wonder how is this even legal? The only useful job the HR departments are ever required to do - they decide to automate it? Aside from being a daycare for adults, what exactly does HR accomplish? It's clearly NOT on the side of employees, but this seems like they're clearly NOT on the side of employers, either. While resume's are being filtered left and right, they just make TikTok's on company's dime [1]. What a sad state of affairs. [1] https://www.reddit.com/r/theprimeagen/comments/1tkgml2/bolt_...
makeavish
Hiring and job search has been so hard and AI has amplified the existing problems instead of solving any.
gs17
I'm a little confused, is this an ATS system that anyone actually uses? If not, I'm not sure how it's better than just asking ChatGPT to score your resume out of 100. Why would you want to optimize your resume for a system no one is using to score it?
yieldcrv
this will get patched, as in I'll optimize my resume for this and so will many other people that any edge disintegrates