November 3, 2025
Black Mirror HR, now hiring
Show HN: I was tired of wasting engineer time on screening calls so I built Niju
AI interview tool promises speed — devs call it unpaid homework
TLDR: Niju wants to replace first calls with a 20‑minute AI‑graded coding session to speed hiring. The community split fast: some applaud saved engineer time, while many candidates reject more testing as unpaid labor that ignores human fit, sparking a fairness vs. efficiency showdown.
Startup Niju just crashed the hiring party with a bold pitch: ditch first‑round calls for a 20‑minute coding challenge that an AI reviews in 5 minutes. Faster decisions, less calendar chaos, cheaper than tying up senior engineers — that’s the sales pitch. But the thread lit up with job‑seekers who say this just shifts the burden onto them. One skeptic blasted it as unpaid homework, while another warned you can’t automate “do we actually want to work together?” vibes.
Supporters see relief for busy teams; critics see a colder, Black Mirror HR future where a bot grades your thinking. The hottest take: if screening is about mutual fit, a recorded coding test can’t show chemistry, communication, or culture. A weary candidate chimed in with battle scars from endless online tests and drew a hard line — no more puzzles, no more hoops.
Yes, Niju claims 88% less engineer time and a faster offer for top talent. But candidates counter: “Cool story, boss — what about our time?” Memes flew: “LeetCode PTSD,” “Hunger Games: Code Edition,” and “Press F to pass probation.” The vibe? A classic tech showdown: save the company’s minutes, or save the candidate’s dignity. Choose your fighter.
Key Points
- •Niju replaces screening calls with a 20‑minute, asynchronous, recorded coding session.
- •Hiring teams receive an AI‑powered report with transcript, code playback, and analysis for a ~5‑minute review.
- •Assessments focus on practical, real‑world coding tasks and claim to be up to 2.5x more predictive than traditional interviews.
- •Cited metrics: 88% reduction in engineer time per candidate, ~3x lower per‑screen cost ($30 vs. $88), and ~30% shorter hiring cycle.
- •Simple, transparent, pay‑per‑use pricing with all features included; no subscription required.