171–180 of 265 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Given how poor and assumptive your logical reasoning is, the candidate is lucky for not working with you.
If it's so poor, it should be pretty easy to explain why.
I’m reasonably certain that I interviewed someone using this or something like it in the last few days. Lots of eye scanning while looking above the window they’d been typing into. Pauses. Big pastes. One of my excellent colleagues noticed that the candidate made use of exciting C++ casts before ever defining the variable’s types. Complete inability to explain or debug the code just written. So. Frustrating in two di…
It sounds like you want sympathy but it just shows that some people just don't understand the power dynamics of an interview. I believe live coding is a scourge and we should get rid of it altogether. Get a tiny open ended project, which requires more design/architecture skills than actually finishing the solution. You do it at your own time and shouldn't take more than 1-2h. You submit it and provide your mental pro…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That was my favorite interview ever. The guy gave me 30 lines of code, and asked questions about it. Including finding the questionable constructs in it.
It was also my favorite interview format as well. Interviewer had a small API. Found missing error handling, missing validations, poor choice of ID column type, missing index for a high volume read query, possible XSS vector. Loved the format so much I ended up making a small FOSS tool for code review as interview: https://coderev.app
Earlier quoted context omitted.
FAANG jobs absolutely hire engineers over zoom. It’s not just one interview, but the whole process is done remotely over video. It typically includes somewhere between 5 to 10 sessions covering coding, architecture and behavioral. Source - work at a FANG which engineers exclusively via remote video call.
Is the option of in-person available to the candidate?, zoom interviews are exhausting
But I predict this won’t do what the authors claim: it won’t fix anything, and it won’t change technical interviews that much. At most it might increase the number of companies that require remote candidates to fly in and interview in person to do the same practical coding problems they used to do online. Which would be the standard from just a few years ago, anyway.
Practical coding problems (also known as work simulation interviews) are the most effective and least biased tools available for evaluating candidates. Not every hiring manager does a good job using these tools, but if you see misuse, take it as a sign that the manager might not be good to work for.
I have trouble understanding the authors thinking here that anything would be worth the cost of this: it’s a trust-busting tool where people are deceiving their potential employer. Trust is foundational to everything, in work and in life. We need more trust in our society, not less.
I’m reasonably certain that I interviewed someone using this or something like it in the last few days. Lots of eye scanning while looking above the window they’d been typing into. Pauses. Big pastes. One of my excellent colleagues noticed that the candidate made use of exciting C++ casts before ever defining the variable’s types. Complete inability to explain or debug the code just written. So. Frustrating in two di…
It sounds like you want sympathy but it just shows that some people just don't understand the power dynamics of an interview. I believe live coding is a scourge and we should get rid of it altogether. Get a tiny open ended project, which requires more design/architecture skills than actually finishing the solution. You do it at your own time and shouldn't take more than 1-2h. You submit it and provide your mental pro…
Why bother with this style of interview where the candidate is under extreme time pressure and isn’t allowed to use any of the research tools they would normally use in their job? What is this controlling for? It barely made sense when these were conducted in person, and it’s completely inane over video meeting. Instead of grilling people, talk to them. Give them meaningful take-home exercises that you can discuss to…
I let candidates use the Internet (except AI tools) during coding interviews. All I care is if given a problem can they do the necessary research to solve it. It usually involves making them use a library which they are not already familiar with. This is more than enough for most of the programming jobs.
I let candidates use X during coding interviews.
I've personally seen this evolve over the past 20 years
Whiteboard --> Text editor --> IDE --> ...?
Maybe "AI Coding Assistant" is next.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Huh? I've done take-home problems and they've been fine. I'll take it 100% of the time over live coding.
Sure, if *you* did them they might have been fine. One really important thing the interview needs to screen for is the qualifications of the person actually trying to be hired, and not their buddy doing the work instead.
I wonder: if a LLM can answer typical interview question better than a human, what kind of questions should we ask so that using a LLM becomes worthless? Something that LLMs are forbidden to talk about? Something that LLM doesn't know well? In my experience, LLMs are pretty bad with low-level languages like Rust/C when you need to deal with pointers and ownership, avoid extra copies. Another option is to ask for some…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How do employers fix being blasted with resumes from unqualified morons?
A lot use recruiters to reach out to talent, that is how I got my current job. I applied directly and got ghosted but a month later a 3rd party recruiter reached out to me and I got the same job I applied for. Lots of other jobs have funnels through referrals and networks, people can make recommendations of past colleagues. The only way to stop people from blasting resumes is to make it cost them something, for examp…