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

I am sick of LeetCode-style interviews

nelson.cloud

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

601–610 of 625 posts

Re: I am sick of LeetCode-style interviews

#601

Post by civilized »

emodendroket wrote: post #575
civilized wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the fact that there is a standardized test ...a standardized test? No. There are tests. They sure as heck aren't standardized. Maybe they should be, since everyone seems to be doing the same thing.

Within one organization the form is standardized, and across companies it's very similar. But sure, maybe not the right word. I'm comparing it to "just letting the interviewers chat and decide based on whatever" which is typical in industries without a skills test.

Leetcode-style tech interviews fall far short of standardized tests. In real standardized tests, the same questions are given to everyone, and effort is made to develop new questions not known to the test takers.

They're more like a standardized test than a pure shoot-the-shit interview is, but still pretty far away.

Re: I am sick of LeetCode-style interviews

#602

Post by emodendroket »

angoragoats wrote: post #590
emodendroket wrote: post #585

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This leaves those who don’t wish to limit their candidate pool by previous stack experience with no option.

No, it doesn’t. I was just giving an example from personal experience. For any given job, I believe there’s a way to design an assessment that allows the candidate to demonstrate skills directly relevant to the job, even if the job doesn’t have requirements that are as specific as “Rails developer with a few years of experience.” I have yet to see a single job listing in several decades in the industry where I think…

I've done a lot of whiteboarding interviews in my life and it's never been "implement a quadtree." It's always, at its core, a small coding probably that could plausibly be part of a real-world problem, and therefore it is directly relevant to the job.

Re: I am sick of LeetCode-style interviews

#603

Post by angoragoats »

emodendroket wrote: post #602
angoragoats wrote: post #590

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it doesn’t. I was just giving an example from personal experience. For any given job, I believe there’s a way to design an assessment that allows the candidate to demonstrate skills directly relevant to the job, even if the job doesn’t have requirements that are as specific as “Rails developer with a few years of experience.” I have yet to see a single job listing in several decades in the industry where I think…

I've done a lot of whiteboarding interviews in my life and it's never been "implement a quadtree." It's always, at its core, a small coding probably that could plausibly be part of a real-world problem, and therefore it is directly relevant to the job.

I've also never been asked a question like this, but it's because I specifically avoid the companies that are known to ask them. Sounds like you have as well (knowingly or not). But the OP is about LeetCode-style interviews, so that's what I was discussing.

Re: I am sick of LeetCode-style interviews

#604

Post by John23832 »

emodendroket wrote: post #583
John23832 wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should a job be an exam? For someone who has worked at both FAANGS and startup, I've never found a job that remotely matches a leetcode problem. Most companies are building products anyway.

Because it seems a fairer way of apportioning limited opportunities than just looking at what school you went to, looking at previous companies on your resume, or seeing how well you can shoot the breeze.

An irrelevant exam vs nepotism/cronyism aren't the only two options.

Re: I am sick of LeetCode-style interviews

#605

Post by 6510 »

palata wrote: post #571
6510 wrote: post #547

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would argue that is only true in an employer employee relationship. I fondly remember laughing my ass off with the owner of a company about what a shit job he was offering. A shit job with shit pay, no wonder you are looking for employees. It took me 5 minutes to figure out there was no real job worth considering. We spend the better part of an hour just chatting after that. [In my opinion] he was drowning in work…

> I would argue that is only true in an employer employee relationship. Then let me tell you: it's not really a choice. It's not something the company writes somewhere. If the interviewee feels like the interviewer is in a dominant position, then the interviewer is in a dominant position. I feel like that as an interviewee, and I am absolutely certain that most people do. Maybe you don't, that's good for you. But you…

Trying to figure out how to transplant that state of mind into a comment box I wrote a long text then deleted it :)

I think the best formula to get out of the submissive mind set is to apply for jobs you don't want. Ideally something you are madly overqualified for.

Re: I am sick of LeetCode-style interviews

#606

Post by gofreddygo »

dinobones wrote: post #6

Leetcode style interviews probably serve two functions: 1) A way to suppress wages and job mobility for SWE. Who wants to switch jobs when it means studying for a month or two? Also, if you get unlucky and some try hard drops an atomic LC hard bomb on you now you have an entire company you can no longer apply to for a year. 2) A way to mask bias in the process while claiming that it’s a fair process because everyone…

  > A way to suppress wages
  > A way to mask bias
  > Same gender? Same race? 
  > someone you don’t like
Ok fair points. it really could be a thing when you've already decided and are just playing around the process. But ya'know even when there isn't an inherent bias from race, gender, alma maters and overall like ability, the whole tech interview process still sucks.

The shit soup presented at a coding interview, leetcode or take home style ones are a result of wholesale cargo cult stupidity than malice.

There's no incentive at any level in BigCo. Margins are too big for top level to care. its hard to measure, middle management layer can easily fudge metrics while driving the org effectively into the ground. Lower layer that made it through the filter, sick of this grind and are busy filing tasks sipping free coffee.

The elephant in the room is that you cannot make hiring a process driven activity.

This is org level dysfunction. There's more such exhibits - DEI, promo criteria, ERGs, re-org politics, vendor selection to name a few.

Re: I am sick of LeetCode-style interviews

#607

Post by palata »

6510 wrote: post #605
palata wrote: post #571

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I would argue that is only true in an employer employee relationship. Then let me tell you: it's not really a choice. It's not something the company writes somewhere. If the interviewee feels like the interviewer is in a dominant position, then the interviewer is in a dominant position. I feel like that as an interviewee, and I am absolutely certain that most people do. Maybe you don't, that's good for you. But you…

Trying to figure out how to transplant that state of mind into a comment box I wrote a long text then deleted it :) I think the best formula to get out of the submissive mind set is to apply for jobs you don't want. Ideally something you are madly overqualified for.

> Ideally something you are madly overqualified for.

Sure, I don't deny that! I'm just saying that not everybody is lucky enough to have that luxury. I am quite confident that most interviewees somehow need the job (or "a" job, but each opportunity matters), and most interviewers are effectively in a dominant position.

And it is much easier for an interviewer to realise that they are in a dominant position than for an interviewee to not give a shit about the fact that they need the job.

Re: I am sick of LeetCode-style interviews

#608

Post by EdgarVerona »

I feel like a large number of software engineer positions interview as if they are looking for computer scientists.

The distinction is subtle, but important in terms of what is needed for the role.

Most software engineers are going to be asked to solve problems and actively avoid recreating algorithms and libraries from scratch while doing so: it represents added time, risk of bugs, and complexity to do so for minimal gain in many cases.

For most software jobs, the more important role when it comes to algorithms is in choosing which algorithm is most relevant to a task, not implementing it from scratch. To do so is often wasting your companies' time.

It's unpopular, but most software engineering (including most of my own career) is closer to a plumber than a scientist. And you know what? We provide a lot of value as plumbers, as unsexy as it sounds.

It's for these reasons that I think leetcode is an unsuitable test for most software engineering positions.

Re: I am sick of LeetCode-style interviews

#609

Post by jgoodknight »

I personally fight against this trend by almost entirely indexing on problem solving approach when I give leetcode interviews at my BigTech. For me at least it's possible to get a strong hire recommendation even if you only get a brute force solution. I only care that I think you could get to a solution eventually, and are professional in the way you get there.
Post reply on HN