Show HN: Interviews Chat – Never bomb another job interview with this AI copilot (interviews.chat)
Here's what Interviews Chat offers:
Personalized Question Prep: Paste your resume and the job description, and our AI will generate a tailored list of potential interview questions. No more generic lists – get ready for the specific questions you're most likely to face.
Realistic Practice: Record your answers to practice questions in a simulated interview environment using your webcam. This helps you get comfortable with the format and build confidence.
In-depth Feedback: Our AI analyzes your recorded responses, providing detailed feedback on content relevance, clarity, and even your confidence level.
Real-time Interview Copilot: For those crucial live interviews, our AI acts as a silent partner, listening in and offering real-time suggestions on what to say next. It can even analyze whiteboard challenges and coding tasks to help you shine.
Tech Stack:
Interviews Chat leverages the power of Next.js, React, Vercel, and OpenAI's cutting-edge language models (GPT, Whisper) to deliver a seamless and effective interview preparation experience.
Why I Built It:
I believe everyone deserves to feel confident and prepared going into a job interview. Interviews Chat removes the guesswork and anxiety, providing you with the tools and insights you need to showcase your skills and land your dream job.
Try it out:
I'm excited to share Interviews Chat with the HN community. You can try it out with free credits at https://www.interviews.chat
I'd love to hear your feedback and suggestions!
49 comments
[ 2.1 ms ] story [ 192 ms ] threadEspecially career / professional.
I see two main ways it could shake out.
In the less exciting case, the copilot isn't very good. It takes a long time, or produces assistance that obviously came from an LLM, or gets candidates regurgitating nonsense during the interview. In that case, I get a decent "don't hire" signal, for the same reason I wouldn't want to hire someone who was getting a friend to message them answers during a live interview.
In the more exciting case, the copilot is really good. It allows candidates who wouldn't otherwise pass the coding interview (whether for technical skill reasons, or behavioral reasons, or whatever) to breeze through like an expert. If this were to happen, I think it would massively devalue the "do LeetCode hards on a whiteboard" style of coding interview, and force interviewers to favor signals that are more relevant to real-world employee performance.
Well, until in the long run, the AI gets good enough to excel at all of the qualities that make human employees good employees... in which case we'll all retire to a life of comfortable, post-singularity, fully automated luxury gay space communism. Right?
My bet would be that the whiteboard interviews become even more important, except it'd have to be done on site to ensure the interviewee cannot use LLM aids. Basically, everything between submitting the CV and onsite would be binned, the CV filtering becomes a lot more stringent.
If a candidate wants to use AI, why not allow them do it supervised and then ask more interesting follow up questions or throw a twist into the problem that AI will stumble on instead of copy/pasting solutions out of an answer book?
You raise a crucial point: instead of banning or penalizing AI use, why not embrace it as an opportunity to assess candidates on a deeper level?
What you're more likely to get are in-person interviews or interviews in some controlled environment.
Sounds like cheating. If you're using an assistant during an interview are you the one shining or them?
If you're smart enough to put this thing together -- then you're smart enough to see this fact as well.
What you've created here is a cheating tool, straight up.
I don't see any validity to this argument.
It was hard to get signal before, and with tools like this it'll be even harder. If these systems are any good (big if) it'll be neigh impossible.
There's a point to having skill in an AI (and search engine) world.
On the other hand, some candidates possess deep technical skills but lack the confidence to articulate them effectively, especially in high-pressure situations. AI assistance can level the playing field for candidates who might otherwise struggle to showcase their true abilities.
It's hard to get a goddamn job. It's hard to pass ridiculous interviews that end up having little to do with the job you do.
In my view this evens the playing field just a little.
I don’t think a product like this would be needed if the interview requirements haven’t been getting out of control for the last 10 years. We’ve all read the posts about how interviews are being done these days.
If companies don’t want products like these then let’s tame the interview process.
There are probably as many companies or more that do interviews in a fair and logical way vs. the ones that don’t. However, everyone goes into them these days fearing the worst.
It’s fine if I’ve asked you if you have any questions for me about the company/job but if I ask you about your experience or your thoughts on a topic and you starting reading then we’re done.
I already don’t like it when people parrot my company’s marketing site back at me. Saying “I see on your site you say X” is fine but trying to work it in naturally (as if it was their idea) feels forced and borderline deceptive/manipulative. It’s like they are expecting me to say “On wow, we think the same way! How cool that you came to the same conclusion/idea/etc” and not “oh, I see you read our website and are parroting it back”.
It’s the same way that some interviewees with about-face on something they just said when they realize they stepped in it. “I don’t like X language”, “we use X language here…”, “I mean I like X language a lot and can’t wait to write more of it!”. Don’t just tell me what you think I want to hear.
Years back I even realized that I was far over-preparing for interviews because I like to be prepared. So I had a canned response to basically every question that was going to be asked. Not surprisingly, I didn't get any of those jobs.
Who would have guessed that hiring managers aren't looking to hire robots with zero personality and that an interview is not a trivia game show that the hiring manager is just adding up points from "correct" answers to see who wins and nothing else.
For example: “Describe a production issue you dealt with and how you approached it”. It doesn’t matter what the issue was, how you fixed it, etc. I want to see that you _have_ dealt with a prod issue and also talk through how you solved it or how you debugged the problem.
In an interview I’m trying gauge how you think, how you will interact with me/the team, how you approach problems. If you can talk and explain your reasoning you are already ahead of the pack. The worst thing you can do is freeze up. Give me a stream of consciousness over freezing up any day of the week.
I often ask questions like “What do you think about X tech?” just to get you talking about it, not because I want you to say “I love it” or “I hate it”.