Stop Interviewing with Leet Code • Hacker News Board

Re: Stop Interviewing with Leet Code

#301

Post by frostwarrior » Thu, Jun 09, 2022, 1:49 PM UTC

blueflow wrote: post #186

bpicolo wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> replaced them with real engineers nice gatekeeping. Shame on them for working to get a job they want.

After seeing all the unreliable and buggy software, i think more gatekeeping in IT would probably be beneficial. You wouldn't let someone do surgery on you that hasn't been to medical school.

IMHO IT should be less geeky an "leet" and more professional.

The quality of a product shouldn't rest solely on having faith that you hired good programmers by chance.

Re: Stop Interviewing with Leet Code

#302

Post by adregan » Thu, Jun 09, 2022, 1:50 PM UTC

jmyeet wrote: post #117

This is a tired topic at this point. The mistakes people make are: 1. An interview proces exists to fill a position. It doesn't exist to fairly assess an individual candidate. Candidates would like that. That's not the point. If there are 10 candidates and the employer fills the role successfully, they've achieved their goal even if someone great was filtered out; 2. FizzBuzz came about because many people talked a g…

A simple problem with constraints can be really fun. For example, implement FizzBuzz without using any looping constructs.

Re: Stop Interviewing with Leet Code

#303

Post by syspec » Thu, Jun 09, 2022, 1:50 PM UTC

Strongly disagree.

Leetcode interviews are not perfect, but they're vastly superior to the previous system of throwing away resumes which did not come from the right pedigree.

Re: Stop Interviewing with Leet Code

#304

Post by vidarh » Thu, Jun 09, 2022, 1:54 PM UTC

bruce343434 wrote: post #129

okeuro49 wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have over a decade of experience, including driving big technical change at one organisation, and was filtered out by a timed leetcode test. I put together a repository of leetcode practice, as I had a feeling that I would have bad luck on the day. They didn't look at this. The internal recruiter said it kept happening for seniors and people with a lot of experience, but his hands were tied, as the leetcode process…

>it kept happening for seniors and people with a lot of experience Why would this be? Old brains not being as "flexible" to think up novel solutions?

More likely a lot of us don't feel we have to cram for problems suitable to screen entry-level candidates at most.

Personally I'm perfectly happy to be filtered out by such tests and refuse to practice for them, as companies that use them for senior level positions are companies I really don't want to work at.

Re: Stop Interviewing with Leet Code

#305

Post by lambic » Thu, Jun 09, 2022, 1:55 PM UTC

I've been in the industry for many years and I've never had to do this. Is it mostly an American thing?

I had to do a coding test for the job I'm doing now but it was a "take home" test and was directly related to the work I would be doing.

Re: Stop Interviewing with Leet Code

#306

Post by nvarsj » Thu, Jun 09, 2022, 1:55 PM UTC

gautamdivgi wrote: post #280

I hear this all the time. Don’t use programming tests, don’t use LC or HackerRank, etc. What do other professions that demand high skill do? As an example - medicine. How are doctors interviewed when they switch jobs? The beauty of LC type interviews is that it requires no validation by your existing employer or no public record or demonstration of work. In the absence of LC, I’m afraid we have to settle for some of…

Doctors are an interesting comparison, because they also have gatekeeping in terms of how difficult it is to get the credential in the first place. That early filter basically guarantees anyone with an MD has a certain level of competence. SW engineering doesn't have anything like that - it's a complete free for all, and the number of inadequate applicants vastly dwarfs the competent ones.

Having said that, big tech interviews heavily bias against certain groups of people, especially older candidates and those with families. On the flip side, if you're young and have virtually no experience, you can still get a cushy big tech job simply by studying sets of questions. In that way, it's quite unique that "anyone" can get this great job simply by grinding exam style questions. No other high paying industry is like that.

Re: Stop Interviewing with Leet Code

#307

Post by brandall10 » Thu, Jun 09, 2022, 1:55 PM UTC

danaris wrote: post #293

brandall10 wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Leetcode doesn't measure "smart and determined to succeed". It measures "has enough extra time and energy to devote to practicing pointless brainteasers for weeks." In other words, whatever it's intended to do, one of its primary functions in practice is to screen out people who are bright, driven...and poor, working long hours and trying to keep themselves and/or their families going.

Weeks? There are stories on Blind and the LC forums of people taking upwards of a year with pretty hefty real-life constraints. And why wouldn't they, given the opportunity to essentially double comp over standard industry jobs? That's a life changing opportunity if you're in a somewhat unfortunate life situation.

That it's a bit of a sacrifice is the point. If you're naturally smart enough this stuff comes quickly, great. If not, you're going to have to work for it - that requires discipline most people don't have.

Better put, smart and/or determined to succeed.

Re: Stop Interviewing with Leet Code

#308

Post by tomp » Thu, Jun 09, 2022, 1:56 PM UTC

> So What To Use Instead?

> Deal with ambiguity, Reviewing code, understanding what it does, finding gaps, Testing, Code structure, Cleanliness, Learning new concepts

Yeah, no.

A lot of these are culture. I'm fairly confident I can teach someone smart and competent to write clean code, add tests, and properly modularise the project.

It's called training (progression from "junior" to "senior"), I think more companies need to invest in it.

What you can't teach someone, is how to be (1) smart, (2) understand how computers work, and (3) be passionate about tech. That's what interviews are supposed to test, and leetcode (and some deep discussions, e.g. "how does a hashtable work" then leading deeper into the details of CPU, memory, instruction scheduling, optimisation, ...) does that.

Re: Stop Interviewing with Leet Code

#309

Post by overrun11 » Thu, Jun 09, 2022, 1:59 PM UTC

kanonieer wrote: post #152

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. It's an assessment that's designed to find people who are ready to submit to an endless grind with little to no skepticism. Developers who question the technical usefulness of LC interviews…

The average college graduate makes ~60k out of school. The median law school new grad makes ~80k. Yet a large group on Hacker News acts like anyone who studies enough to get into a FAANG company fell for some horrible scam.

I've studied less than 200 hours in my life and now make ~320k and expect to get ~450k when I switch jobs later this year (both remote)– I have only a high school diploma. Chalk me up as another victim of big tech... I guess I should've been more "skeptical".

Re: Stop Interviewing with Leet Code

#310

Post by ep103 » Thu, Jun 09, 2022, 1:59 PM UTC

wiseowise wrote: post #102

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…

> 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. Statistically that’s irrelevant, as they optimize for “do not let through rotten apple”, rather than “find good apple”.

Which is horseshit. I'm currently working at my first bigco company, and I would consider the MAJORITY of people they have hired in the last year to be horrifically bad hires, because they have optimized for new hires that can leetcode, but can't actually code.

We just fired a person on my team who didn't understand pass by value vs pass by reference, or how to debug in an ide, but she could manipulate strings in leetcode!