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

Stop Interviewing with Leet Code

fev.al

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 675 posts

Re: Stop Interviewing with Leet Code

#211

Post by willcipriano »

sdevonoes wrote: post #180
bigpeopleareold wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't do leetcodes because I am not really into programming puzzles (or parlor tricks :D ), but I roughly tried to do what you described. ~45 minutes it took, deciding in the middle to not worry about the algorithm. Guess I won't get the job ... shrugs.

You won't get the job not because you "didn't worry about the algorithm" but because you didn't ask any questions about the problem; just went straightforward to the implementation. In FAANG interviews that would be a red flag.

So even if you deliver exactly what they were expecting they are upset that you didn't need to ask any questions to get there?

Re: Stop Interviewing with Leet Code

#212

Post by andrewingram »

nonameiguess wrote: post #169
andrewingram wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's an assumption you're making that these challenges only filter out a small amount of qualified candidates. I suspect the percentage is actually quite significant. In my experience it's usually bigger "looks good on a resume" companies that do these challenges, which suggests they're getting enough candidates in the funnel to be able to afford turning away a lot of more-than-qualified applicants. I've failed mo…

That assumption isn't being made at all. That's why it says with sufficient throughput of candidates. If you need to hire 100 people, have 10,000 candidates, 1,000 of whom are qualified, and a 90% false negative rate, you'll get the 100 true positives you need, while leaving 900 well-qualified people pissed off. The process is bad for most of the candidates, but works fine for the company doing the hiring. The proble…

> "Their ability to filter out 'those who can't code' in an efficient manor while sacrificing a small amount"

This is the assumption I was referring to, that the "sacrifice" is small. It's suggesting that the false-negative rate for LeetCode challenges is small, and I'd argue it's actually quite high -- as you also suggest (your rate is 90%).

Re: Stop Interviewing with Leet Code

#213

Post by sumeno »

EdwardDiego wrote: post #200
UncleMeat wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google doesn't allow any code on laptops. Everything is done via web IDEs or ssh into a linux machine. So nobody is using brew to obtain dependencies.

Do you work for Google? I'm just doubting you a little. Like the guy from project zero is finding bugs in Windows via ssh to a Linux machine? Definitely going with Doubt here.

They are correct. Stuff like project zero is an extreme outlier. I've been using a MBP for 5 years and have never used homebrew on it.

Re: Stop Interviewing with Leet Code

#214

Post by Koshkin »

yonaguska wrote: post #179
gitfan86 wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems like a huge inefficiency in the economy that thousands of people are studying and practicing for an entrance exam that has no value in the real work that the companies actually do. But overall that may be a good thing for society. If Google fired all their leet coders and replaced them with real engineers they would not need as many. And the biggest problem may be that there is a limited number of real engin…

In your opinion, what's the difference between a leetcoder and a real engineer? In my mind, a real engineer really shines in the non technical aspect of things, like coordination, communication, prioritization, and getting hard questions answered. But that's just me, I'm curious what everyone else's experiences are.

I don't know about that, the best engineers I have met were introverts. (They preferred reading to "communicating.")

Re: Stop Interviewing with Leet Code

#215

Post by EdwardDiego »

sumeno wrote: post #213
EdwardDiego wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you work for Google? I'm just doubting you a little. Like the guy from project zero is finding bugs in Windows via ssh to a Linux machine? Definitely going with Doubt here.

They are correct. Stuff like project zero is an extreme outlier. I've been using a MBP for 5 years and have never used homebrew on it.

Cheers for clarifying :)

I'll admit that surprises me greatly, I can't see why it's considered more efficient, but hey, Google.

Re: Stop Interviewing with Leet Code

#216

Post by nazka »

willcipriano wrote: post #192
yonaguska wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In your opinion, what's the difference between a leetcoder and a real engineer? In my mind, a real engineer really shines in the non technical aspect of things, like coordination, communication, prioritization, and getting hard questions answered. But that's just me, I'm curious what everyone else's experiences are.

To me a real engineer is good at engineering, what you described sounds like a good HR manager.

Same. The biggest point that I didn’t see in comments so far is that Leet Code exercices are really fast to evaluate and it accelerates the pipeline for filtering and hiring. Even a recruiter can “evaluate” them. Just looking at the code more or less and if the automatic tests pass. Which is not the case for exercises for engineers. If you want a real engineering problem it would be mostly about architecture which are long and hard to evaluate. Or about how to break down a rotten program and apply SOLID and other like that to redesign it. Same thing long and hard to evaluate.

Re: Stop Interviewing with Leet Code

#217

Post by thisiswrongggg »

gitfan86 wrote: post #172
brhsagain wrote: post #148

All of these supposed "flaws" of leetcode are by design. Big companies want people who are smart enough to do the work, but obedient enough to put up with all the bullshit that comes with working at a big company. What person better matches that than someone who's able and willing to study for and pass a tech version of the SAT? Every anti-leetcode article I read is some version of "leetcode is bad because it measure…

It seems like a huge inefficiency in the economy that thousands of people are studying and practicing for an entrance exam that has no value in the real work that the companies actually do. But overall that may be a good thing for society. If Google fired all their leet coders and replaced them with real engineers they would not need as many. And the biggest problem may be that there is a limited number of real engin…

How many companies have written and still do write their very own IAM solution? Duplicating work and inefficiencies is at the core of modern IT production.

Re: Stop Interviewing with Leet Code

#218

Post by brandall10 »

brhsagain wrote: post #148

All of these supposed "flaws" of leetcode are by design. Big companies want people who are smart enough to do the work, but obedient enough to put up with all the bullshit that comes with working at a big company. What person better matches that than someone who's able and willing to study for and pass a tech version of the SAT? Every anti-leetcode article I read is some version of "leetcode is bad because it measure…

Every unicorny startup I've interviewed w/ that had a standard big-tech interview loop (1 LC style screener + final w/ 2-3 rounds of LC + 1 system design) was chock full of ex-big tech engineers and managers, replete with stories about wanting a faster paced / dynamic environment.

So yes, that absolutely is who they are recruiting. It probably comes down to no more than believing big tech companies have the very best in the industry (ie. like being in an Ivy League school) and standardizing the hiring bar w/ other companies they're actively in competition with. More than obedience, it probably is the aspect that they're smart and determined to succeed.

Re: Stop Interviewing with Leet Code

#219

Post by willcipriano »

sai_c wrote: post #116
hiq wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Someone who builds a truly novel technology solution involving hundreds of hours of effort This person should already have enough of a reputation to get a job at many companies, if their work is public enough. What do you suggest for the 99%+ other candidates?

> This person should already have enough of a reputation to get a job at many companies, if their work is public enough. But then why do people with that kind of reputation still (at certain companies) have to jump through these hoops? https://www.theregister.com/2010/04/21/ken_thompson_take_our... > What do you suggest for the 99%+ other candidates? What about (instead of forcing a months long decision process upon…

My expectation with such an arrangement is that if you do decide to hire me, since I am now a known quantity you won't have an excuse to pay anything other than top of the market rates. "You said you hire only the best right, and you've seen me work, you want to hire me, looks like the best make $X."

Re: Stop Interviewing with Leet Code

#220

Post by adamors »

anonymoushn wrote: post #191
PragmaticPulp wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Considering the normalization of spending hundreds of hours grinding LC questions and the industry built around whiteboard interview preparation, my (n=1) conclusion is that LC interviews is not about technical assessment at all. The “hundreds of hours” grinding LC is largely for juniors without experience. I don’t know any senior engineers who had to grind LeetCode like that for their FAANG interviews.

People frequently post here saying that they are senior and needed to do that or would need to do that.

Yeah, there are multiple blog posts from senior engineers who took 1-2 months off to grind LC just to get into Google/Meta etc.
Post reply on HN