Look, testing sucks. You know it sucks. We know it sucks. It misses all the good people and hires all the wrong people.

​
The Problem with Traditional Testing

Your current testing platform probably makes candidates:
  • Implement merge sort for the 47th time this year
  • Reverse a linked list while being watched through a webcam
  • Solve LeetCode problems that have zero connection to debugging a Django migration at 2 AM
Meanwhile, the person you actually want to hire:
  • Gets anxiety from whiteboard coding
  • Hasn’t memorized every sorting algorithm since college
  • Can actually solve real problems when your legacy codebase catches fire

​
What Error Golf Actually Does

We give candidates deliberately insane scenarios that require creativity, not memorization:
  • Human Logic: “Design a car recommendation system for middle-aged men having existential crises”
  • Programming: “Build an error handling system for Mars colonists when the oxygen recycler starts speaking Klingon”
  • Chemistry: “Calculate molecular stability when your lab is in a earthquake during a solar flare”
The catch? Shortest answer wins. Like code golf, but for hiring.

​
Why This Actually Works

AI can’t cheat: Try pasting “Help 47-year-old divorced engineer buy sports car without destroying retirement fund” into ChatGPT. You’ll get generic advice, not the compressed wisdom that comes from actual experience. No memorization: There’s no “correct” algorithm to memorize. Just pure problem-solving under pressure. Tests real skills: The ability to compress complex understanding into elegant solutions is what separates experts from beginners.

​
The Scoring

Three AI personalities roast each submission across multiple dimensions:
  • Quality: Is this code someone could actually maintain?
  • Creativity: Did they find an approach nobody else would think of?
  • Ingenuity: How cleverly did they handle the chaos we threw at them?
  • Humor: Bonus points for making us laugh while solving impossible problems

​
Integration Overview

You have two options:
  1. The Simple Way: Send candidates a company code, get webhook notifications when they’re done
  2. The “I Have Too Much Time” Way: Build a custom integration using our API
Most people pick option 1 because they have actual work to do.

​
Pricing That Doesn’t Suck

  • Setup: $49 once (cheaper than your lunch budget)
  • Per Test: $39 only when someone actually submits
  • Monthly Minimum: $0 (revolutionary concept, we know)
Compare this to your current platform that charges $500/month whether you’re hiring or not.

​
What Happens Next

  1. Candidate gets your code
  2. Picks 3 questions from our vault of programming nightmares
  3. Submits solutions in whatever format makes sense
  4. Three AI reviewers analyze and roast their work
  5. You get detailed feedback via email and webhook
  6. We charge your card $39
  7. You make a hiring decision based on actual problem-solving ability
That’s it. No seat management, no quota limits, no enterprise sales calls.