Free isn't even free to them. If a company is paying their HR staff, the minutes to hours that they spend learning a new interface, and setting it up, and using it, are a real cost.

Compare that to an existing service, where they only have to do the last part, and are dividing that cost by the millions of jobseekers that the existing solutions already reach.

Hi, OP here. Really like your approach! Like you we want to solve for talent-first. We believe we can add value for hirers beyond just charging to post jobs. Please get in touch if you'd be interested in discussing further (email in bio).

"because every company is busy paying the Indeeds/Linkedins of the world"

The reason why is because they possess significant competitive advantages.

Im actually working on something in this space and am building out competitive advantages with government backing that'll make LinkedIn and Indeed an inferior offering in my country.

If youre going to enter a market with established incumbents, you wont go very far without a lot of strategic-thinking.

OP here. Appreciate the feedback - the login barrier is definitely something we will take on board. I think some level of identity authentication is a must to counter the scourge of bot traffic, but we will think of ways to be cleverer about this.

With regard to job posting accuracy - absolutely this is a problem. Normalising what different job descriptions actually _mean_ is one of the key challenges we want to solve.

It's a really good feature that I'd love to see, but that would be like giving dating site users the chance to review their past dates. Why would companies want to expose their image to that scrutiny?

Great suggestion, many thanks

Hi, OP here. One of the problems we want to solve is the proliferation of bot traffic on job sites. Requiring a Google login is the simplest way to achieve this for the time being.

Hi, OP here. Perhaps "minimal barriers" would have been more accurate. One of the problems we want to solve is the proliferation of bot traffic on job sites. Requiring a Google login is the simplest way to achieve this for the time being.

How else would you farm user data to be sold off later?

Hi, OP here. Would you be willing to share your query? I will investigate.

Excellent point - they are sorted by frequency they appear in the data. We have search boxes in the keyword selectors (funding stage, location, etc) but not in tags where arguably it's most useful. Will work this into an upcoming release. Many thanks!

Hi, OP here. This is the "catch-22" of job sites. If they are open to the web they become swamped with bot traffic. If they are closed then users have to overcome a barrier to use them. We have tried to find a middle ground and use the lowest-effort way (for users) to demonstrate authenticity in the form of a Google login. But we understand this might be putting users off so we are looking at ways we can give away a bit more before requiring a login. Appreciate your feedback.

Hi OP here. Thank you for the feedback, which specific issues jump out at you?

That's overstating the problem, but accessibility is very important.

Hi, OP here. One of the things we've discovered is that companies post their jobs in a number of locations but often forgot to take them down when the jobs are filled. Compounding this is the fact that some job sites automatically take down ads after a set number of days (say 30 or 60). Working out whether or not a job is "live" is therefore non-trivial but something we actively want to solve.

Appreciate the feedback!

Agent is definitely an area I'm looking to improve with persistence and make it truly personalised.

Hi dang, I'm the OP and a longtime user of HN so I appreciate your fair-handedness on this. We have a small circle of enthusiastic early-users and we made them aware of our 'debut' without explicitly soliciting votes or comments.

No ban hammer execution for the clear number of sockpuppet accounts promoting this?

From https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

> Don't solicit upvotes, comments, or submissions. Users should vote and comment when they run across something they personally find interesting—not for promotion.

I enjoyed using the platform. It's really simple to use, and I really love how it allowed me to easily find jobs in industries that I'm interested in. Plus, the cofounders are very friendly and always willing to help

Love this approach, the founders really put a lot of time and effort into figuring out what us as users want.

Job hunting is a serious chore and having good filtering and UI really matters in such a diverse industry, big love for the platform!

A great approach as both applicants and companies are now surrounded by lot of noise. Specially it can be a unique opportunity for early stage startups to present themselves and have a share from the applicant pool.

I truly appreciate the platform’s design and the logical flow - it feels intuitive and visually pleasant. I also like how the interaction with the company and the role you’re applying for is presented more clearly. The wide range of filters, combined with the option to further personalize with Nell, also gives you extra confidence that all your considerations are being taken into account. Overall, it looks very solid for the stage you’ve reached.

Its great to find potential startups to join, espacially with the matching function. does my profile also get recommanded to startups?

"Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something."

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

"Be respectful. [...] Don't be gratuitously negative."

https://news.ycombinator.com/showhn.html

(Edit: originally the parent comment just said "Meh I dont see this going very far" without the second sentence.)

Many thanks for your kind words and thoughtful feedback.

Which additional pieces of job information do you think we should surface before clicking?