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

Interviews in the Age of AI: Ditch Leetcode – Try Code Reviews Instead

chrlschn.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 286 posts

Re: Interviews in the Age of AI: Ditch Leetcode – Try Code Reviews Instead

#121

Post by klinquist »

francisofascii wrote: post #96
indymike wrote: post #69

We use this process, and it has helped us hire some great developers without having to use third party staffing and headhunters: 1. Post well written job post on major job boards. 2. Immediately reply via text to every applicant (yes, we have opt in on the application) 3. Initial screening including several knock-out questions via text. Immediately let candidate know if they are not selected and why. 4. 30 minute can…

> we occasionally have to let someone go on background issues What kind of issue would that be?

Undisclosed felonies is a popular one.

Re: Interviews in the Age of AI: Ditch Leetcode – Try Code Reviews Instead

#122

Post by OnionBlender »

mochomocha wrote: post #67

Be the change you want to see in the world. I refuse to interview at places that are Leetcode-heavy. Never prevented me from getting 7 figures offers at FAANG-type companies. Similarly when I interview candidates, I don't ask them Leetcode questions either. I like to get a sense of whether or not a candidate can reason in semi-unknown territories and has good intuition, not if they can parrot a textbook.

What are some FAANG-type companies that don't ask Leetcode-heavy questions?

Re: Interviews in the Age of AI: Ditch Leetcode – Try Code Reviews Instead

#123

Post by lolinder »

bluehorizon2 wrote: post #26

People are forgetting why companies these days do Leetcode in the first place. The initial reason why we have Leetcode today is that Google originally determined through their interview research that the smartest candidates were the ones who were best at algorithms. Google wanted to hire the smartest people, not necessarily the best coders, so that’s why their interviews were mostly algorithmic. Of course everyone st…

> The initial reason why we have Leetcode today is that Google originally determined through their interview research that the smartest candidates were the ones who were best at algorithms. ... It’s funny that people have lost that intent and are now creating derivatives around that, ie thinking code reviews are a good replacement.

Have you considered that what's actually happened is people are finally realizing that they don't want to optimize for the characteristics that Google is optimizing for?

Setting aside the question of whether "smart"s are something that can be sought out without a more specific definition, the average business doesn't need "smart" programmers. They need programmers who are predictable, who reliably produce good-enough software, who communicate well in speech and in writing and who work well on a team. Algorithmic ability provides essentially zero signal for these capabilities, so it's not so much that people have lost the intent that they're realizing that the process they cargo culted isn't appropriate for their hiring needs.

Re: Interviews in the Age of AI: Ditch Leetcode – Try Code Reviews Instead

#124

Post by oofta-boofta »

indymike wrote: post #69

We use this process, and it has helped us hire some great developers without having to use third party staffing and headhunters: 1. Post well written job post on major job boards. 2. Immediately reply via text to every applicant (yes, we have opt in on the application) 3. Initial screening including several knock-out questions via text. Immediately let candidate know if they are not selected and why. 4. 30 minute can…

[dead]

Re: Interviews in the Age of AI: Ditch Leetcode – Try Code Reviews Instead

#125

Post by burkaman »

mochomocha wrote: post #67

Be the change you want to see in the world. I refuse to interview at places that are Leetcode-heavy. Never prevented me from getting 7 figures offers at FAANG-type companies. Similarly when I interview candidates, I don't ask them Leetcode questions either. I like to get a sense of whether or not a candidate can reason in semi-unknown territories and has good intuition, not if they can parrot a textbook.

7 figures? I appreciate your stance, but if you're getting million dollar offers I'm not sure your advice is relevant to most of us. It's like a movie star saying "why bother auditioning, just wait for a director to request you specifically".

Re: Interviews in the Age of AI: Ditch Leetcode – Try Code Reviews Instead

#126

Post by ghostpepper »

throwaway38475 wrote: post #105
lmarcos wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone not familiarized with background checks, why is it weird to do bg checks after handing the offer? If the employer does the bg check before handing the offer, that means the candidate hasn't resigned yet from their current job. So wouldn't the bg check expose the candidate? (E.g., my boss would know I'm thinking about leaving)

Background checks don't call your old boss. How would they even know who that is?

Have you ever done a background check with HireRight? They ask you for all of your previous companies and contact them to verify. I think there is an option not to call your current employer.

Re: Interviews in the Age of AI: Ditch Leetcode – Try Code Reviews Instead

#127

Post by xwdv »

joeframbach wrote: post #82
indymike wrote: post #69

We use this process, and it has helped us hire some great developers without having to use third party staffing and headhunters: 1. Post well written job post on major job boards. 2. Immediately reply via text to every applicant (yes, we have opt in on the application) 3. Initial screening including several knock-out questions via text. Immediately let candidate know if they are not selected and why. 4. 30 minute can…

I can bring my kids in but I don't think I could tell you how they work. I've been in this industry for almost 20 years, but I don't have side projects, because, well, see above.

Freelancers can quickly build out some side projects for you to use on your resume if you wish. It shouldn’t be a big deal.

Re: Interviews in the Age of AI: Ditch Leetcode – Try Code Reviews Instead

#128

Post by OnionBlender »

hcks wrote: post #43

I don’t get why people always hate on leetcodes. Anyone can train and get good at it, it makes interviews short and not time consuming, it’s a standard accros industry so you can focus on studying it and not have to read one book for each company you apply to. What would be a better alternative? Hiring based on connections? Take home assignments that takes 15 hours to complete? Domain specific knowledge grilling?

One problem is that they keep making the leetcode interviews harder because many people spend a lot of practicing. Simply solving a problem isn't good enough anymore. Now you have to solve two problems in 40-45 minutes with the optimal solution. The only way I've been able to solve two problems in 40-45 minutes is if I've seen the problem before.

Re: Interviews in the Age of AI: Ditch Leetcode – Try Code Reviews Instead

#129

Post by shrimp_emoji »

ziddoap wrote: post #90
indymike wrote: post #69

We use this process, and it has helped us hire some great developers without having to use third party staffing and headhunters: 1. Post well written job post on major job boards. 2. Immediately reply via text to every applicant (yes, we have opt in on the application) 3. Initial screening including several knock-out questions via text. Immediately let candidate know if they are not selected and why. 4. 30 minute can…

It's great that you quickly notify candidates if they aren't a fit! Wish more people did that. But.... > Bring a side project, show us how it works. What do you do if someone doesn't have a side project (or want their side project to be reviewed by someone they don't know)? Some people code to live, not live to code.

Then those people get ranked lower (for good reason).

Re: Interviews in the Age of AI: Ditch Leetcode – Try Code Reviews Instead

#130

Post by alexb_ »

galangalalgol wrote: post #58
anthonypasq wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assure you, they would if they could, but its illegal.

A quick search indicates that it is not illegal in the US as a whole, but maybe California?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Griggs_v._Duke_Power_Co.
Post reply on HN