Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: What is interviewing like now with everyone using AI?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 735 posts

Re: Ask HN: What is interviewing like now with everyone using AI?

#131

Post by kortilla »

OutOfHere wrote: post #124
evilduck wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's pretty obvious when someone's input focus changes to nothing or when their mouse leaves the screen entirely, or you could just ask to see the display settings to begin. Doesn't solve for multiple computers but it's pretty obvious in real time when someone's actual attention drifts or they suddenly have abilities they didn't have before. Either way, screen sharing beats whiteboards. Even if we throw our hands up…

There is nothing fraudulent about using LLMs. If people can use them on the job, it's okay to use them on the interview. They're the calculators of tomorrow if not of today. Interviewing just needs to adapt such as by assessing one's open source projects and contributions. Not much more is needed. And if the candidate completely misrepresents their open source profile, this can be handled by an initial contract-to-hi…

> There is nothing fraudulent about using LLMs.

There is if you’re asked not to.

Re: Ask HN: What is interviewing like now with everyone using AI?

#132

Post by [deleted] »

mr_00ff00 wrote: post #99
twoparachute45 wrote: post #70

My company, a very very large company, is transitioning back to only in-person interviews due to the rampant amount of cheating happening during interviews. As an interviewer, it's wild to me how many candidates think they can get away with it, when you can very obviously hear them typing, then watching their eyes move as they read an answer from another screen. And the majority of the time the answer is incorrect an…

So depressing to hear that “because of rampant cheating” As a person looking for a job, I’m really not sure what to do. If people are lying on their resumes and cheating in interviews, it feels like there’s nothing I can do except do the same. Otherwise I’ll remain jobless. But to this day I haven’t done either.

[deleted]

Re: Ask HN: What is interviewing like now with everyone using AI?

#133

Post by xyst »

If a problem can be “trivially” solved by GPT. The problem is with your interview process, not the tool. It’s wild to me that interviewers still ask candidates for senior positions leetcode type questions. Yet the actual job is for some front end or devops position.

The gap between interview and actual on job duties is very wide at many — delusional - companies.

Re: Ask HN: What is interviewing like now with everyone using AI?

#134

Post by Apocryphon »

kortilla wrote: post #128
ryandvm wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know, I kind of feel like leetcode interviews are a situation where the employer is cheating. I mean, you're admittedly filtering out a great number of acceptable candidates knowing that if you just find 1 in a 1000, that'll be good enough. It is patently unfair to the individuals that are smart enough to do your work, but poor at some farcical representation of the work. That is cheating. In my opinion, if a…

The employer sets the terms of the interview. If you don’t like them, don’t apply. What you’re suggesting here isn’t any different than submitting a fraudulent resume because you disagree with the required qualifications.

On principle, what you’re saying has merit. In practice, the market is currently rife with employers submitting job postings with inflated qualifications, for positions that may or may not exist. So there’s bad actors all around and it’s difficult to tell who actually is behaving with integrity.

Re: Ask HN: What is interviewing like now with everyone using AI?

#135

Post by danielbln »

what wrote: post #89
danielbln wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, the challenge involves using a python LLM framework to build a simple RAG system for recipes. It's not a hidden requirement per se to use LLM assistance, but the candidate should have a good answer ready why they didn't use an LLM to solve the challenge.

Why is it a negative that the candidate can solve the challenge without using an LLM? I don’t really understand this. Also, what is a good answer for not using one? Will you provide access to one during the course of the interview? Or I am just expected to be paying for one?

It's not negative that the candidate can solve it without an LLM, but it is positive if the candidate can use the LLM to speed up the solution. The code challenge is timeboxed.

We are providing an API key for LLM inference, as implementing the challenge requires this as well.

And I haven't heard a good answer yet for not using one, ideally the candidate knows how to mitigate the drawbacks of LLMs while benefiting from their utility regardless.

Re: Ask HN: What is interviewing like now with everyone using AI?

#136

Post by probably_wrong »

nimish wrote: post #94

If your interview process is susceptible to AI then you don't need to hire for the job. Just use an AI and prompt it. The job you are therefore hiring for is now trivial. If it weren't, no amount of AI could pass your interview process.

I belive this line of thinking mistakes the result with the process, similar to assuming that the reason companies ask people to reverse a linked list is because there's an unmet market demand for list-reversal algorithms.

An interview has to be hard enough to filter those that are unqualified but also easy enough that the right person can pass with some minor preparation. If an interviewer asked me for the equivalent of production-ready code to add support for custom hardware in the Linux kernel I'd either reply with my freelance hourly rate or I'd end the interview.

Re: Ask HN: What is interviewing like now with everyone using AI?

#138

Post by twoparachute45 »

kortilla wrote: post #128
ryandvm wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know, I kind of feel like leetcode interviews are a situation where the employer is cheating. I mean, you're admittedly filtering out a great number of acceptable candidates knowing that if you just find 1 in a 1000, that'll be good enough. It is patently unfair to the individuals that are smart enough to do your work, but poor at some farcical representation of the work. That is cheating. In my opinion, if a…

The employer sets the terms of the interview. If you don’t like them, don’t apply. What you’re suggesting here isn’t any different than submitting a fraudulent resume because you disagree with the required qualifications.

Yea, exactly.

If a candidate were up front with me and asked if they could use AI, or said they learned an answer from AI and then wanted to discuss it with me, I'd be happy with that. But attempting to hide it and pretend they aren't using it when our interview rules specifically ask you not to do it is just being dishonest, which isn't a characteristic of someone I want to hire.

Re: Ask HN: What is interviewing like now with everyone using AI?

#139

Post by what »

danielbln wrote: post #135
what wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it a negative that the candidate can solve the challenge without using an LLM? I don’t really understand this. Also, what is a good answer for not using one? Will you provide access to one during the course of the interview? Or I am just expected to be paying for one?

It's not negative that the candidate can solve it without an LLM, but it is positive if the candidate can use the LLM to speed up the solution. The code challenge is timeboxed. We are providing an API key for LLM inference, as implementing the challenge requires this as well. And I haven't heard a good answer yet for not using one, ideally the candidate knows how to mitigate the drawbacks of LLMs while benefiting fro…

>I haven’t heard a good answer for not using one

Again, what would be a good answer? Or are you just saying there isn’t one?

Post reply on HN