471–480 of 735 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
And yet this interviewing problem seems to only affect tech companies.
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…
The opening question is a copy of what was done before (probably by someone who doenst work at IBM anymore) and all the new stuff is stolen from outsiders.
Part of my resume review process is trying to decide if I can trust the person. If their resume seems too AI-generated, I feel less like I can trust that candidate and typically reject the candidate. Once you get to the interview process, it's very clear if someone thinks they can use AI to help with the interview process. I'm not going to sit here while you type my question into OpenAI and try to BS a meaningful res…
> If their resume seems too AI-generated, I feel less like I can trust that candidate and typically reject the candidate So you just subjectively say "this resume is too perfect, it must be bullshit"? How the fuck is any actual, qualified engineer supposed to get through your gauntlet of subjectivity?
I am imagining an AI saying my CV is AI-generated, when in reality, I do not even use Auto-correct or Auto-suggest when I (type)write! :-)
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…
Especially people with ADHD don’t remember details as long as others, even though ADHD does not make someone a bad hire in this industry (and many successful tech workers have it).
I do prefer take-home challenges to live coding interviews right now, or at least a not-rushed live coding interview with some approximate advance warning of what to expect. That gives me time to refresh my rust (no programming language pun intended) or ramp up on whichever technologies are necessary for the challenge, and then to complete the challenge well even if taking more time than someone who is currently fresh with the perfectly matched skills might need. I want the ability to show what I can do on the job after onboarding, not what I can do while struggling with long-term unemployment, immigration, financial, and family health concerns. (My fault for marrying a foreigner and trying to legally bring her into the US, apparently.)
And, no, my life circumstances do not make it easy for me to follow the common suggestion of ramping up in my “spare time” without the pressures of a job or a specific interview task. That’s completely different from when I can do on the job or for a specific interview’s technical challenge.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are. Only noobs do this, experts using a llm are way more efficient. (Unless you work like with the same language and libraries for years)
> (Unless you work like with the same language and libraries for years) I'm not sure what you mean here? Are you saying that if you work with the same language for years that you're some how not proficient with using LLMs?
Even remotely, normally a coding interview isn't a candidate typing things for 45 min on a screen. There are interactions, follow-up questions, discussions about trade-offs and so on... I suppose it's possible for a good candidate to cheat and get some extra points, but the interview isn't broken yet.
You could also let the candidate use AI, and still gather all the relevant signals.
Can I hallucinate answers in an interview, and have them rated as acceptable?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can't tell us that LLM's aren't ready for prime time in 2025 after you tried Copilot twice last year. New better models are coming out almost daily now and it's almost common knowledge that Copilot was and is one of the worst. Especially right now, it doesn't even come close to what better models have to offer. Also the way to use them is to ask for small chunks of code or questions about code after you gave them…
I stopped using AI for code a little over a year ago and at that point I'd used Copilot for 8-12 months. I tried Cursor out a couple of weeks ago for very small autocomplete snippets and it was about the same or slightly worse than Copilot, in my opinion. The integration with the editor was neat but the quality of the suggestions were no different than what I'd had with Copilot much earlier, and the pathological case…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
most experienced developers don't have a portfolio because they code for a living lol
I don't really think this is true? This might be true for developers that only work for companies and never in their own time maybe. My portfolio site is just one of the sites on my personal website that also hosts many of my projects. It wasn't much work to setup, and it provides organization and sharing capability so there's motivation to make it anyways.
So most people with young kids then
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 iss…
That's a vital part of writing software though.