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

Interview Coder is an invisible AI for technical interviews

interviewcoder.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 126 posts

Re: Interview Coder is an invisible AI for technical interviews

#31

Post by sbuttgereit »

exrhizo wrote: post #11

Rather than banning AI in technical interviews, better to see how the candidates use it and if they can comprehend what the LLM is saying, the quality of their prompts and own thinking.

I couldn't agree more. LLMs are legitimate tools and, ideally, I want to see how effective a candidate is in using their available tools to solve complex problems.

The service on offer here is different. It's providing a means to use LLMs to fake your way through a technical interview.

Showing that you can use LLMs to quickly and correctly solve problems is a good skill to have. Offering up a solution from an LLM as your own work without acknowledging how you got there is just misrepresentation... or to put it another way is just lying. Maybe fake your degrees and experience while you're at it, right?

At least in the long run, many that need these tools to get in will be found out once they start having to solve real problems on the job. Just a shame about other, more qualified people being turned away. Of course if the LLM was sufficient enough on its own, perhaps a real software developer was never required to begin with.

Re: Interview Coder is an invisible AI for technical interviews

#32

Post by raverbashing »

The problem with people that think they're too smart is that they usually lack theory of mind

This crap is transparent. A person actually solving the problem won't type that fast or not think silently about it. And even better, the LLMs usually get stuck in a snag on some of the problems, or they write weird snippets

(though this might bring down the number of interviewers asking for leetcode)

Re: Interview Coder is an invisible AI for technical interviews

#33

Post by danielvaughn »

My approach to technical interviews is just to talk shop with the candidate for an hour.

Throughout the conversation, we mostly stay light and touch on a lot of different topics. But every so often, I’ll drill in and start discussing some random topic at depth. If you drill in just 2-3 times throughout the interview, you get a pretty clear picture of the candidates average depth of knowledge.

Not only is this LLM proof, but you also get a sense of their opinions, their interests, their passion, etc.

Re: Interview Coder is an invisible AI for technical interviews

#34

Post by ErikAugust »

The industry seems so divided on AI right now.

We have interviews where we aren't allowing the use of it (yet interviewees are using stealth AIs to cheat). At the same time, I am also hearing of organizations mandating the use of it, ie: "20% of the code committed needs to be generated". There's probably a set of orgs that exist that do not allow the use of AI in coding interviews, yet practically mandate the use of AI in day-to-day work!

We are at an inflection point I think, but my guess is AI is going to win out soon enough.

Re: Interview Coder is an invisible AI for technical interviews

#35

Post by cbg0 »

18172828286177 wrote: post #29

Great, I cant wait to go back to onsite interviews where I have to spend an entire day (at least) getting to some random office and sitting in an uncomfortable chair to do my on-sites

Don't forget about implementing quicksort on a whiteboard.

Re: Interview Coder is an invisible AI for technical interviews

#36

Post by agubelu »

rvz wrote: post #20

Good. This destroys a system that is already broken and renders Leetcode and others useless for evaluating candidates in the AI era. The most ironic thing is that this qualifies for "hacking a system to your advantage" for Y Combinator. Those that are upset by Interview Coder as 'cheating' are themselves bounded by an outdated system waiting to be disrupted and Interview Coder is the result of that. The only way to s…

On-site and leetcode aren't mutually exclusive. We'll simply go back to in-person leetcode questions which will be equally shit.

Re: Interview Coder is an invisible AI for technical interviews

#39

Post by poincaredisk »

rvz wrote: post #20

Good. This destroys a system that is already broken and renders Leetcode and others useless for evaluating candidates in the AI era. The most ironic thing is that this qualifies for "hacking a system to your advantage" for Y Combinator. Those that are upset by Interview Coder as 'cheating' are themselves bounded by an outdated system waiting to be disrupted and Interview Coder is the result of that. The only way to s…

Some people here seem to believe this will make leetcode obsolete. I'm afraid it will just make cheatting a status quo - if everyone else aces the coding part of the interview because of some AI tool, then you are at a severe disadvantage if you try to play by the rules. From the perspective of the hiring manager it'll look like the coding questions are too easy, since everyone gets them right, except that one experienced person for some reason.

Re: Interview Coder is an invisible AI for technical interviews

#40

Post by KaiserPro »

poincaredisk wrote: post #10
colesantiago wrote: post #2

This is brilliant and necessary, Leetcode needs to die and a means to an end in the age of AI. For our business we don't use Leetcode, the future looks something like paid bounties and in person interviews. tinycorp from George Hotz does the very same thing of paid bounties to get hired there. The highly talented people will do this for fun, while those who aren't will self select themselves out. (0) https://tinygrad…

>Leetcode needs to die and a means to an end in the age of AI. This is just, like, your opinion. Your future employer may think otherwise, and look for people with algorithmic skills. "But leetcode is actually evil" is just your rationalisation of your cheating.

leetcode is a bastard. I fucking hate it with a passion.

Its almost useless as a way to learn how to be a better coder, as most of the "fastest" answers are unreadable.

But if you are using it as a basis for interviews, you are more likely to bump into someone who has trained on that particular question.

I'm not sure what the answer is, as other said, pair programming is kinda the answer. Maybe debugging something in your code base.

Post reply on HN