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

541–550 of 651 posts

Re: AI killed the tech interview. Now what?

#541

Post by solarmist »

hirvi74 wrote: post #521
solarmist wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> I’m tired of the FAANG mentality personally. As someone that never had a desire nor ever made an attempt to work at any of those companies, do you mind elaborating on the mentality of such places? I'm just your boring below-average to average dev, so I know I'm not cut for those types of places, but it never truly bothered me anyway. Any reason that I can personally think as to why I would work for such a company w…

It has turned into something similar to what people in trading companies on Wall Street deal with. Constant grind, unrealistic expectations, and projects done in order to get a promotion instead of because it provides value to the customers or the business.

That said the amount that you make is insane some of the smartest engineers I’ve ever worked with have been at these companies and a lot of them have really strong engineering cultures, and standards.

The current work environment seems designed to use up bright young engineers, and burn them out within a few years. This is a significant shift from 15 years ago, where it was a much more sustainable place to be.

Re: AI killed the tech interview. Now what?

#542

Post by solarmist »

codr7 wrote: post #523
solarmist wrote: post #509

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn’t answer the question. For me as a job applicant even in the best case I would need to do 3 to 5 interview interviews. The same is true for companies in the best case it will take at least 3 to 5 interviews to find somebody. Are they supposed to have 3 to 5 temporary staff for weeks at a time? How much time should that take per interview? How would somebody that currently has a job manage that kind of time…

Yeah, you would need to change your expectations, I figured that much was obvious.

I felt like I was doing that with what I described.

What changes to expectations are you talking about?

Re: AI killed the tech interview. Now what?

#543

Post by dennis_jeeves2 »

Clubber wrote: post #191
dennis_jeeves2 wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Lol a bit touchy aren't we? No. I just looked up other responses to your post. It's obvious you got exposed as being inexperienced (or an idiot), while posing to know the definitive with your "gotcha". Being inexperienced (or ignorant) is not a problem, but being cocky is.

I think you're projecting. You aren't posting this using your real name are you?! Here's something to consider, Dennis. Instead of using any type of reasoning that maybe I'm interviewing for a language you aren't familiar with where functions and procedure differences matter, you decided to just go off the handle and call me inexperienced and/or an idiot. This is what we call in the hiring business a "huge red flag."…

Look up my other responses - I decided to call you names _later_ . Other people also pointed that out to you. I'm sure you would thick twice before asking your 'gotcha' again (the question is fine in general but not as a gotcha).

Re: AI killed the tech interview. Now what?

#544

Post by hirvi74 »

andyjohnson0 wrote: post #350
karaterobot wrote: post #184

The best interview process I've ever been a part of involved pair programming with the person for a couple hours, after doing the tech screening having a phone call with a member of the team. You never failed to know within a few minutes whether the person could do the job, and be a good coworker. This process worked so well, it created the best team, most productive team I've worked on in 20+ years in the industry,…

Some of us find the prospect of pairing with an unknown person in an unknown environment, and against the clock, to be very stressful.

I would find trying to solve such problems with known people in known environments to be somewhat stressful too.

Re: AI killed the tech interview. Now what?

#545

Post by solarmist »

swatcoder wrote: post #410
solarmist wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 the…

I find this attitude baffling.

In my time at tier one companies I have worked with the best engineers I have come across in my entire career (even the worst engineers were more than competent) who were working on deep issues that could affect the revenue of the entire company because they’re laser focused on providing value to the business, instead of doing engineering for engineering’s sake. I have grown by far more in these kinds of roles than I have anywhere else because the kind of problems you encounter at such a high scale just don’t exist elsewhere. And most of them have been there for at least five years if not longer you don’t make those kind of contributions to accompany without a long tenure.

Re: AI killed the tech interview. Now what?

#546

Post by trhway »

ghaff wrote: post #533
codr7 wrote: post #524

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm fully convinced the way to make better hires is to invest more, which will be more expensive. Which wouldn't be a problem unless we expected something else. It starts with quitting pretending the current process is working, or even close to optimal.

Has hiring ever really worked, anywhere? Especially as roles and need evolve? I guess you could argue that it sort of did, apropos of a play I saw last night on the astronaut program--and maybe the military in many cases more broadly. But, in many cases, I'm not sure how I, as a candidate for a tech job, would feel about a company offering me $200K--no strings attached--with the proviso that I statistically only had…

>Has hiring ever really worked, anywhere?

yes. Best place i worked at - we hired only by internal references and only people from our University. Up until the company grew around 200 people. We didn't do technical interviews, just a short talk. And we were among top employers, including salary-wise.

Re: AI killed the tech interview. Now what?

#547

Post by frankfrank13 »

SJC_Hacker wrote: post #301
frankfrank13 wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

McK's case interview is just as game-able as HackerRank style interviews. There are entire consulting clubs at many colleges that teach this exact interview style. It's true that it's harder (but not impossible) to use AI to help, but calling it an IQ-like test is true only as much as any other technical interview. That being said, McK did create an entire game that they claim can't be studied for ahead of time. If t…

> That being said, McK did create an entire game that they claim can't be studied for ahead of time. If the intention is to test true problem solving skills, then maybe that's roughly equivalent to a systems interview, which is hard(er) to cheat . Sure, right up until someone leaks it

Maybe, but they have hundreds! And new ones every quarter! Having done both systems and case interviews I can say that leaking is not as big a problem as with coding interviews. Sure you can memorize how to build Netflix/Zoom, or how to analyze P&L for a sandwich shop, but those interviews depend on interviewers throwing in complications or asking clarifying questions.

Re: AI killed the tech interview. Now what?

#548

Post by callingbull »

kasey_junk wrote: post #535
callingbull wrote: post #527

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing works well but IQ tests predict job performance better than anything else.

Do you have a citation?

Schmidt et al., 2016 The Validity and Utility of Selection Methods in Personnel Psychology: Practical and Theoretical Implications of 100 Years of Research Findings

Re: AI killed the tech interview. Now what?

#549

Post by apwell23 »

drdaeman wrote: post #449
apwell23 wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes they are unchangeable. I've tried many many times to break out of it; it works for a while but i revert back to my base behavior. We know what kinds of temperament a dog has within few months of it being a puppy ( and who the puppy's parents are). Why would it be different for humans. Claim that Our temperaments ( and our likes/dislikes for travel) are all learnt is a bizzare blank slate claim that doesn't track…

> Why would it be different for humans. Because animals typically live in a way more static and uneventful environments, and they have much more limited mental capabilities? Humans (and other animals) aren't a completely black slate - but unlike most animals, humans have very complex societies that affect their behaviors throughout their entire lives. A few years in a different environment start to change people. Kid…

base temperament is irrelevant then?

My shy cat could've been a party animal like her sister :)

Re: AI killed the tech interview. Now what?

#550

Post by callingbull »

tptacek wrote: post #538
kasey_junk wrote: post #535

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have a citation?

Also, an explanation for why more companies aren't doing them given their effectiveness? They're extremely easy to administer.

Possibly legal and reputational risks, considering some groups do badly on IQ tests.
Post reply on HN