[jarsin]

Startup idea to truly solve this would be large network of onsite test / interview centers.

I had to do all my certs onsite in test centers in early 2000's. For one I had to drive 2 hours to take the exam.

Seems like those test centers used to be in every mid size city in the country.

[bdangubic]

too expensive mate… we live in year our Lord 2024 - no one is building 2000 buildings that will be vacant as everyone is working from home (or India…) :)

this requires a simple saas solution - someone’s working on this for sure already as it is already a big issue

[jarsin]

I hear you, and yes old school solution sounds absurd, but I suspect interview cheating will be on par with game cheating. Even if you install kernel level cheat protection systems the game cheater's still find ways around them.

These guys already developed an invisible desktop app to help everyone cheat on remote interviews.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42348147

[bdangubic]

no question there will be cat&mouse here but even more incentive for some stanford grads to charge premium for “unbreakable quantum-proof interview experience” :)

[mdaniel]

I don't believe one needs a startup to solve that problem - there are already a bazillion certification paths for a bazillion tech stacks. The(?) problem is one of trust from the hiring org that the certs mean anything, and that's where the whole discussion devolves into one of (gatekeeping|but muh leetcode|our business problem is special|$other)

[jarsin]

I meant a startup that provides onsite screening / verification of candidates for companies. Only pre-verifed candidates can apply to company jobs. If the candidate is not local, the company can use the test center to do a remote screen in an environment where candidate cannot cheat. Etc.

I just brought up certs because back in the day you could not take those test online due to cheating.

Now in the age of AI you can't do any type of testing remote, imo.

[mdaniel]

I half-way suspected that's what you were going for (testing-as-a-service) but my point still stands: it is a web-of-trust bootstrapping problem. For example, Otherbranch[1] exists, is a startup, and is trying to handle pre-screening candidates, but they seem to have very few companies that are currently using them. One would assume if they were solving a real problem then companies would be beating down their door to get real, verified, actual people and yet.

1: see https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=otherbranch.com - the folks spun out of Triplebyte

[bdangubic]

this ain’t about pre-screening at all, it is about solving a different kind of problem. if you have experienced it already, you haven’t interviewed anyone recently.

[mdaniel]

You are correct, I'm over here stuck on the applicant side, feeling like both sides of this transaction are suffering from the same lack of trust

I therefore fail to see how introducing another party that the hiring managers have to cede their trust to solves our mutual lack of trust

If your company (since your reply implies that you are at least "hiring manager adjacent") merely needs that testing center to start hiring people, I'm totally open to going on Monday and starting a company to provide that service. I even already have a 4k security camera system I can wire up the room to provide DVR access to your interview candidate's session

But my strong suspicion is that such a video camera enabled room for a fee is not, in fact, the obstacle to getting people hired

[bdangubic]

11 out of last 12 candidates interviewed read their answers from chatgpt or the like. always same scenario, video call, interviewer never makes an eye contact and obviously is reading answers. last one I gave my cell and told him to call me, no speaker or bluetooth on the phone and hung up Teams meeting - mate never called back :)))

this is a pandemic already and tool is needed to establish that interviewer is not cheating. prior to today’s tools at interviewer’s disposal this was not really a thing - today it is a huge thing