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

AI killed the tech interview. Now what?

kanenarraway.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 651 posts

Re: AI killed the tech interview. Now what?

#401

Post by bongoman42 »

juujian wrote: post #144
perlgeek wrote: post #132

Company A wants to hire an engineer, an AI could solve all their tech interview questions, so why not hire that AI instead? There's very likely a real answer to that question, and that answer should shape the way that engineer should be assessed and hired. For example, it could be that the company wants the engineer to do some kind of assessment whether a feature should be implemented at all, and if yes, in what way.…

The even bigger challenge is that hiring experts in any domain requires domain knowledge, but hiring has been shifted to HR. They aren't experts in anything, and for some years they made do with formulaic approaches, but that doesn't cut it anymore. So now if your group wants to get it done, and done well, you have to get involved yourself, and it's a lot of work on top of your regular tasks. Maybe more work because…

I've never seen hiring completely in the domain of HR. HR filters incoming candidates and checks for culture fit etc, but technical competency is checked by engineers/ML folks. I can't imagine an HR person checking if someone understands neural networks.

Re: AI killed the tech interview. Now what?

#402

Post by ghaff »

drdaeman wrote: post #387
scarface_74 wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dealing with people and communication can be learned. I get it. By nature I was very much an introvert except for certain scenarios when I was in my comfort zone until at least my mid 30s. I was an only child, the stereotypical short, fat kid with a computer growing up in the 80s (still short, became a gym rat, part time fitness instructor and only stopped the latter as my other obligations became greater). Horrible…

> But you can only add so much value to an organization typing on a keyboard. In my understanding, non-junior software development jobs never were about typing on the keyboard. Senior software engineer is a fancy name for a problem solver, and code is just a specialized tool they can build to possibly achieve the goal. It always was about talking to stakeholders, figuring out what the heck they actually want today, h…

Thinking about engineering leads I know who aren't about leading huge teams, it's still about mentoring, talking to people, making connections, often talking to external audiences, etc.

I think a lot of that is "soft skills." Maybe not becoming a stereotypical sales person. But it's also not don't ever bug me and let me code.

Re: AI killed the tech interview. Now what?

#403

Post by HarHarVeryFunny »

trhway wrote: post #358
codr7 wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hiring doesn't scale, period; deal with it.

it isn't about scale. It is about core principle of the tech hiring - all the companies hire only the best. Not only it is impossible to scale, it is plain impossible. Even if all the companies hired only "above the average" it would still be a pretty tall order :)

There is no one-size-fits-all for software developers. Different companies are looking to hire people at different experience/pay levels, with different skill sets, etc. Just as with dating, most companies are also going to have some understanding of their own "attractiveness", and not try to date out of their league.

FAANG companies offering industry leading compensation packages and prestige are in a position to be able to hold out for the best (even if their interviewing practices may fail to achieve that), but most companies are just looking for someone that checks the boxes and seems like a good fit.

Re: AI killed the tech interview. Now what?

#404

Post by shash »

Shorel wrote: post #250
ToucanLoucan wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the functional difference between copying an AI answer and copying a StackOverflow answer, in terms of it being "cheating" during an interview? I think the entire question is missing the forest for the trees. I have never asked a candidate to write code in any fashion during an interview. I talk to them. I ask them how they would solve problems, chase down bugs, or implement new features. I ask about concepts…

> Languages are largely teachable, it's just syntax and keywords. That's only true for a subset of programming languages, and it requires you to already know how to program in at least another language of the same family. Knowing Java will not help you with Haskell, but it will help you with C#. I have to deal with students using AI to cheat on homework and exams, and I can't allow them to not even learn the basic co…

> That's only true for a subset of programming languages, and it requires you to already know how to program in at least another language of the same family. Knowing Java will not help you with Haskell, but it will help you with C#.

In this context, to a large extent it holds. Yeah. It’s probably more true of mainstream languages roughly related to each other, but in an interview, you’re not testing for knowledge of syntax and keywords. You’re trying to test for ability to build and problem solve.

I share your concern about prompt “engineers” who don’t understand the underlying codebase, language or system. But I don’t know what to do about it in the context of a technical interview.

Re: AI killed the tech interview. Now what?

#405

Post by solarmist »

nickff wrote: post #392
solarmist wrote: post #380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t feel like it was. Every role is hyper specific nowadays. And most refused to look at anybody deviating from their ideal background in my experience.

> "And most refused to look at anybody deviating from their ideal background in my experience." This is often because the culture of job-hopping for better pay every 18 months has eroded the willingness to pay for training or adaptation. Why pay for someone to learn if they're just gonna leave soon; the pre-trained person is a better deal if you'll have to pay to retain anyway.

Which was caused by cost cutting measures, MBA disease, in companies to begin with.

We’re just seeing the end of the cat and mouse struggle that’s been going on since the 60s. And massively accelerated in the 80s.

It’s unfortunate for companies though because they’re the ones that will lose out in the end when all the experienced people start retiring and they have no one to hire.

It’s an untenable position to not train people, period. There is no schooling you could go through that would educated junior dev to the level of a senior dev. And it’s the same for any other role. Experience is not optional.

Re: AI killed the tech interview. Now what?

#406

Post by marcosdumay »

dingnuts wrote: post #294
m11a wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. But what I mean is: that's not how it's perceived in the current interview structure, which lasts maybe 45 minutes or so. Ultimately, going down a dead end means you'd now have 30 minutes to find the right solution and code it up. So the oracle (the interviewer) would probably help you realise sooner that it's a bad idea, so you don't waste your time. That's assuming they know the problem and solution well;…

this is an interviewer problem, unless the candidate is totally silent. A candidate that can't ask questions isn't going to succeed, anyway. If the candidate will communicate with me, I will offer them a LOT of guidance. It is still very, very easy to tell who knows what they are doing and who does not. You give them a basic but domain-specific task, you give them whatever extra context they need to do it, and you wa…

A lot of good people will close-up and not voluntarily ask you any question if you put them under pressure. (What they automatically are on that exercise.)

What is not to say that you are making anything wrong. But watch for bias there.

Re: AI killed the tech interview. Now what?

#407

Post by acheron »

ramon156 wrote: post #64
FirmwareBurner wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>we ask him to show us some code he has written How do you expect them to get access to the property internal Git repo codebase and approval from their employer's lawyers to show it to third parties during the interview? Sounds like you're only selecting Foss devs and nothing more.

Most people have still written code for school or a hobby project. Maybe I'm missing empathy, but I cannot understand how some developers have no code to show. If that's the case however, just let them make a small project over the weekend and then do another interview where you ask stuff about what they've made. It's not that deep

School? You want to see my 1999 Java code? I’ll go dig out the 3.5 floppy for you.

Re: AI killed the tech interview. Now what?

#408

Post by [deleted] »

masterj wrote: post #355
micheles wrote: post #61

Nowadays I am on the other part of the fence, I am the interviewer. We are not a FAANG, so we just use a SANE interview process. Single interview, we ask the candidate about his CV and what his expectations are, what are his competences and we ask him to show us some code he has written. That's all. The process is fast and extremely effective. You can discriminate week candidates in minutes.

> Single interview, we ask the candidate about *his* CV and what *his* expectations are, what are *his* competences and we ask *him* to show us some code *he* has written You... might want to think about what implicit biases you might be bringing here

[deleted]

Re: AI killed the tech interview. Now what?

#409

Post by svilen_dobrev »

codr7 wrote: post #291

The current job market is so messed up that I honestly can't see myself getting a job until we hit a wall and people start using their brains again. I have 26 years of solid experience, been writing code since I was 8. There should be a ton of companies out there just dying to hire someone with that kind of experience. But I'm not perfect, no one is; and faking doesn't work very well for me.

> There should be a ton of companies out there just dying to hire someone with that kind of experience.

heh.. they are probably dead already?

i have even longer years.. But this time i am looking since.. september? Applying 1-2 per day, on average.. Widening the fishing net each month.. ~2% showed some interest.. but no bingo.

"overqualified" is about half of the "excuses" :/

Time to plant tomatoes maybe..

Re: AI killed the tech interview. Now what?

#410

Post by swatcoder »

solarmist wrote: post #336
nickff wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ”There seems to be a weird selection bias that if you're FAANG or FAANG adjacent these small companies aren't interested.” Many smaller companies have noticed that former and wannabe FAANGers are looking for FAANG-type jobs, and are not good fits in their niche. Small companies often have more uncertainty, fewer clear objectives, less structure, and often lower pay. They’re not a good substitute for megacorps.

And then there's people like me who have been at startups, midsize companies, tiny small businesses and FAANGs. Not everyone at a FAANG is purely motivated by the amount of money that they can get. I’m looking for a smaller company because I’m tired of the FAANG mentality personally.

Sure, but in this context, your FAANG experience is a negative signal for people who don't know you well yet. It's unfortunate for you, but a genuine factor you now need to account for.

Your path through will probably look like having the luck of breaking in at one of these kinds of companies, and then staying for several years to demonstrate earnest commitment/fit while building a new network of connections, and then leveraging those connections to get more opportunities if it becomes necessary to do so. If you have connection from your previous non-FAANG work, that's probably your best route.

It won't happen overnight and you'll always be at a disadvantage when you find yourself applying through resume portals. Good luck!

Post reply on HN