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

441–450 of 735 posts

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

#441

Post by lmz »

adastra22 wrote: post #436
fhd2 wrote: post #424

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To add: I can very well imagine this process isn't suitable for FAANG, so I can understand their university exam style approach to a degree. It's easy to arm chair criticise, but I don't know if I could come up with something better at their scale. These days, I'm mostly engaged by startups to help them build an initial team, I acknowledge that's different from what a lot of other folks hire for.

Why not? Plenty of large organizations hire this way. My first employer is bigger than any FAANG company by head count, and they hired this way. Why is big tech different?

The desire for a scalable, standardized scoring mechanism so they can avoid lawsuits.

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

#442

Post by lewisleclerc »

pllbnk wrote: post #437
cuuupid wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So far 3 of the 11 people we interviewed have been clearly using ChatGPT for the >>behavioral We actually allow using AI in our in-person technical interviews, but our questions are worded to fail safety checks. We'll talk about smuggling nuclear weapons, violent uprising, staging a coup, manufacturing fentanyl, etc. (within the context of system design) and that gives us really good mileage on weeding out those who…

I think you (your company) and many other commenters here are just trying too hard. I had just recently lead through several interview rounds for software engineering role and we have not had any issue with LLM use. What we do for the technical interview part is very simple - live whiteboarding design task where we try to identify what the candidate's focus is and might pivot at any time or dig deeper into particular…

Unfortunately, we've noticed that candidates are on another call and their screen is fed by someone else using chatGPT and pasting the responses, as they can hear both the interviewer and the candidate

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

#443

Post by asalahli »

Stratoscope wrote: post #435
fhd2 wrote: post #416

The last time I've used a leet code style interview was in 2012, and it resulted in a bad hire (who just happened to have trained on the questions we used). I've hired something like 150 developers so far, and what I ended up with after a few years of trial and error: 1. Use recruiters and network: Wading through the sheer volume of applications was even nasty before COVID, I don't even want to imagine what it's like…

When I was interviewing candidates at IBM, I came up with a process I was really happy with. It started with a coding challenge involving several public APIs, in fact the same coding challenge that was given to me when I interviewed there. What I added: 1. Instead of asking "do you have any questions for me?" at the very end, we started with that general discussion. 2. A few days ahead, I emailed the candidate the pr…

Love the 3rd point! I might start using that in my future interviews

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

#444

Post by axegon_ »

fhd2 wrote: post #416

The last time I've used a leet code style interview was in 2012, and it resulted in a bad hire (who just happened to have trained on the questions we used). I've hired something like 150 developers so far, and what I ended up with after a few years of trial and error: 1. Use recruiters and network: Wading through the sheer volume of applications was even nasty before COVID, I don't even want to imagine what it's like…

I feel like take home tests are meaningless and I always have. Even more so now with LLMs, though 9/10 times you can tell if it's an LLM-people don't normally put trivial comments in the code such as

> // This line prevents X from happening

I've seen a number of those. The issue here is that you've already wasted a lot of time with a candidate.

So being firmly against take home tests or even leetcode, I think the only viable option is a face to face interview with a mixture of general CS questions(i.e. what is a hashmap, benefits and drawbacks, what is a readers-writer lock, etc) and some domain specific questions: "You have X scenario(insert details here), which causes a race condition, how do you solve it."

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

#445

Post by kamaal »

Fr3dd1 wrote: post #439
kamaal wrote: post #432

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>Do either no take home test, or one that takes at most two hours. I do discuss the solution candidates came up with, so as long as they can demonstrate they know what they did there, I don't care too much how they did it. If I do this part, it's just to establish some base line competency. The biggest problem with the take home tests are not people who don't show up due to not being able to finish the assignment, B…

We did a lot of these assignments and no one assumed that they will be hired if they complete it. Its about how you communicate your intent. I always told the candidates, that the goal of the task is 1. to see some code and if some really basic stuff is on point and 2. that you can argue with someone about his or her code.

>>We did a lot of these assignments and no one assumed that they will be hired if they complete it. Its about how you communicate your intent.

Be upfront that finishing the assignment doesn't guarantee a hire and very likely the very people you want to hire won't show up.

Please note that as much as you want good people to participate in your processes. Most good talent doesn't like to waste its time and effort. How would you feel if someone wasted your time and effort?

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

#446

Post by abenga »

anonzzzies wrote: post #404
abenga wrote: post #391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AI saves you an insane amount of typing, but adds an insane amount of reading, which is strictly harder than typing (at least for me).

Hmm, that is interesting; reading is harder? You have to read a lot of code anyway right? From team members, examples, 3rd party code/libraries? Through the decades of programming at least I became very proficient and rapidly spotting 'fishy' code and generally understanding code written by others. AI coding is nice because it is, for me, the opposite of what you have; reading the code it generates is much faster tha…

"In the small", it's easy to read code. This code computes this value, and writes it there, etc. The harder part is answering why it does what it does, which is harder for code someone else wrote. I think it is worthwhile expending this effort for code review, design review, or understanding a library. Not for code that I allegedly wrote. Especially weeks removed, loading code I wrote into "working memory" to fix issues or add features is much much easier than code I didn't write.

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

#447

Post by aprilthird2021 »

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…

I'm at the same company I think. I don't get why we can't just use some software that monitors clicking away or tabbing away from the window, and just tell candidates explicitly that we are monitoring them, and looking away or tabbing away will appear suspect.

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

#448

Post by aprilthird2021 »

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.

> it feels like there’s nothing I can do except do the same. Otherwise I’ll remain jobless.

Never buy into this mentality. Because once you do, it never goes away. After the interview, your coworkers might cheat, so you cheat too. Then your business competitors might cheat, so you cheat too. And on and on.

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

#449

Post by alkonaut »

It's not the solution itself that is interesting to me, it's first finding out whether the person can go through the motions of solving it. Like reading instructions, submitting solutions etc. It filters out those who can't code at all or who can't read instructions. A surprisingly large chunk. If the person also pipes the problem through an LLM, good.

To then select a good developer I'd test communication skills. Have them communicate what the pros/cons of several presented solutions are. And have them critique their own solution. To ensure they don't have canned answers, I might just swap the problem/solutions for the in-person bit. The problem they actually solved and how they did it isn't very important. It's whether they could read and understand the problem, formulate multiple solutions, describe why one would be chosen over another. Being presented with a novel problem and being asked on the spot to analyze it is a good exercise for developers (Assuming software development is the job we're discussing here).

Just take the time to talk to people. The job is about reading and writing human language more than computer programming. Especially with the arrival of AI when every junior developer is now micro managing even more junior AI colleagues.

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

#450

Post by jajko »

anonzzzies wrote: post #404
abenga wrote: post #391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AI saves you an insane amount of typing, but adds an insane amount of reading, which is strictly harder than typing (at least for me).

Hmm, that is interesting; reading is harder? You have to read a lot of code anyway right? From team members, examples, 3rd party code/libraries? Through the decades of programming at least I became very proficient and rapidly spotting 'fishy' code and generally understanding code written by others. AI coding is nice because it is, for me, the opposite of what you have; reading the code it generates is much faster tha…

When you type the code, you definitely think about it, deepening your mental model of the problem, stopping and going back and changing things.

Reading is massively passive, and in fact much more mentally tiring if whole reading is in detective mode 'now where the f*ck are some hidden issues now'. Sure, if your codebase is 90% massive boilerplate then I can see quickly generated code saves a lot of time, but such scenarios were normally easy to tackle before LLMs came. Or at least those I've encountered in past few decades.

Do you like debugging by just tracing the code with your eyes, or actually working on it with data and test code? I've never seen effective use of such regardless of seniority. But I've seen in past months wild claims about magic of LLMs that were mostly un-reproduceable by others, and when folks were asked for details they went silent.

Post reply on HN