Skip to content

Commit

Permalink
Merge pull request #1 from listingslab-software/staging
Browse files Browse the repository at this point in the history
provision version 1.0.0
  • Loading branch information
javascript-pro authored Apr 13, 2023
2 parents c94316c + 5c37a9d commit b1e109f
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Showing 15 changed files with 18,202 additions and 2 deletions.
1 change: 1 addition & 0 deletions .gitignore
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -102,3 +102,4 @@ dist

# TernJS port file
.tern-port
.DS_Store
25 changes: 23 additions & 2 deletions README.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -1,2 +1,23 @@
# ChatGPT
ChatGPT vs Recruitment Technical Tests
## ChatGPT

### Capter 1) ChatGPT vs Recruitment Technical Tests

#### Overview

As a software engineer it’s normal for me to be asked to complete some kind of technical test during a recruitment process. There are many different methods, approaches and mistakes, but there’s value too. As the process has developed, better tools for analysing candidate skills have emerged. Let’s take as an example; testdome.com. It’s a platform on which a hiring manager can create in depth tests which really do measure a candidate’s knowledge in the areas they are interested in

Trouble is… when I’m looking for a job I’m generally talking to 2 or three different companies at once, so if they all give me big, difficult tech tests I get a bit over it.

I mean, it’s not like I’m being paid for it is it?

Now, in May 2023 we witness the emergence of ChatGPT. Much hype around its ability to answer questions in natural language. That’s nothing compared to how well it writes code. Better code than I do. And faster. So with a specific kind of test (eg testdome), I think I could use ChatGPT to complete the coding test quicker and better than I could do myself. So I think I’ll do that.

Is that cheating? Or is it just doing my job?

#### Scientific Methodology

We’re old skool, so we do things the scientific way. Start with a hypothesis, we test it and present it in a way which can be replicated with the same results by any peer reviewer

#### Hypothesis

That ChatGPT will score higher in an online recruitment test than I would myself. And with much less time and effort
15 changes: 15 additions & 0 deletions package.json
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
{
"name": "chatgpt",
"version": "1.0.0",
"description": "ChatGPT vs Recruitment Technical Tests",
"main": "index.js",
"scripts": {
"start": "clear && cd ./pwa && npm start",
"test": "echo \"LGTM\" && exit 0"
},
"keywords": [
"chatgpt"
],
"author": "@listingslab",
"license": "MIT"
}
23 changes: 23 additions & 0 deletions pwa/.gitignore
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
# See https://help.github.com/articles/ignoring-files/ for more about ignoring files.

# dependencies
/node_modules
/.pnp
.pnp.js

# testing
/coverage

# production
/build

# misc
.DS_Store
.env.local
.env.development.local
.env.test.local
.env.production.local

npm-debug.log*
yarn-debug.log*
yarn-error.log*
Loading

0 comments on commit b1e109f

Please sign in to comment.