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

Interviewing a software engineer who prepared with AI

kapwing.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 731 posts

Re: Interviewing a software engineer who prepared with AI

#91

Post by raincom »

neilv wrote: post #84
raincom wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At the company I work for, we are forbidden to ask questions based on resume, as it introduces biases. Reduction of bias means "ask same questions of every candidate".

Is that because * they don't trust their interviewers to be professional and objective, or * they're trying to have a EEOC CYA paper trail that says they make efforts to be unbiased, or * DEI motivated (e.g., not everyone has the advantage of good past experience as a starting point for conversations), or * some other HR theory?

A combination of all three.

Re: Interviewing a software engineer who prepared with AI

#93

Post by yojo »

inertiatic wrote: post #5

I don't know how this is something related to AI - you could polish and embellish your resume before LLMs too, I'm fairly sure. I guess this gets the clicks. Not being to remember small details about certain projects is also perfectly fine for people who have worked for more than a couple of years. Unless you can discover a pattern of lying like the author supposedly did then I would just be perfectly fine moving on…

I think in this case the candidate didn’t even know enough to embellish the resume unassisted. Their nonsense response on rate limiting showed that they had no idea why you would rate limit or under what circumstances. Ditto for paginating data.

AI allowed them to add plausible work to their resume that they couldn’t have come up with on their own.

Re: Interviewing a software engineer who prepared with AI

#94

Post by scarface_74 »

foobahify wrote: post #74
inertiatic wrote: post #5

I don't know how this is something related to AI - you could polish and embellish your resume before LLMs too, I'm fairly sure. I guess this gets the clicks. Not being to remember small details about certain projects is also perfectly fine for people who have worked for more than a couple of years. Unless you can discover a pattern of lying like the author supposedly did then I would just be perfectly fine moving on…

My memory had held back my career I am sure. I can't regurgitate the minute details of impact I did even 12 months ago, just broad strokes... so I prep as best I can but it probably sounds like I am lying. Now with AI and everyone is suspicious it is worse. Got downleveled to 4yoe level yoe from where I am 20yoe but I needed a job so.

It’s called a career document or a brag document. I update mine every quarter. It’s a detailed summary of the projects I worked on in STAR format including challenges I faced.

Re: Interviewing a software engineer who prepared with AI

#95

Post by 9rx »

Joeboy wrote: post #81
Aurornis wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The thing is, none of these things really changed with AI I agree that lying was possible before AI, but something about AI has emboldened a lot more people to try to lie. Something about having the machine fabricate the lie for you seems to lessen the guilt of lying. There's also a growing sentiment online that using AI to cheat/lie is "fair" because they think companies are using AI to screen candidates. It's not…

I suspect the people saying nothing's changed are not people who've been conducting interviews recently.

I haven't seen the use of AI in interviewing (non-tech) yet, but something has definitely changed: People are now applying in droves.

Re: Interviewing a software engineer who prepared with AI

#96

Post by scarface_74 »

angra_mainyu wrote: post #18
theamk wrote: post #2

An interesting story! I've also had an AI cheater during phone screen, but they were pretty clumsy... A question of form "You mentioned you used TechX on your resume, tell me more what you did with it" was answered with a long-winded but generic description of TechX and zero information about their project or personal contribution. Another thing that I can take away from that is "take home project" is no longer a goo…

Take home projects >>>>> live coding sessions, unless you're interviewing for some kind of twitch streamer position. Just have a 1 hour or 2 hour call with candidate where you guys go through the project.

I would never spend time doing a take home test. The best paying companies never require it, so why would I jump through hoops for nothing but middling compensation on the other side?

Re: Interviewing a software engineer who prepared with AI

#97

Post by ghaff »

9rx wrote: post #86
ghaff wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And people may lean on their networks more (though they already do). I do agree that there’s no reason face to face interviews shouldn’t be the norm again after an initial screen. If some of those things don’t appeal to some candidates? I don’t totally mean that. But some practices should be the default even if some candidates don’t really like them (and even if they’re less convenient or more costly for hiring manag…

> But some practices should be the default even if some candidates don’t really like them Employers didn't have a whole lot of choice in that matter for a long time. Candidates wouldn't show up if you tried to impose that upon them. Granted, nowadays it does appear that the tide has turned back to employers getting to call the shots, especially for lower-level positions. It is less clear how desperate the top talent…

Seems pretty alien to my experience. A lot of senior talent was accustomed to traveling a lot anyway. I’ve certainly always interviewed in person and would probably turn down any company that didn’t offer as an option aside from COVID. But maybe there were a lot of companies that were willing to compromise on face to face so they could get any supposed talent to sign on the dotted line. Of course, they didn’t have much choice for a time even if they subsequently laid people off and/or largely froze hiring.

Re: Interviewing a software engineer who prepared with AI

#98

Post by 9rx »

ghaff wrote: post #87
aaomidi wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Companies just need to fork the upfront $13-1500 dollars for a set of plane tickets for their hiring team and rented conference rooms for a week. It's a whole lot cheaper than spending 50k because you hired the wrong person for half a year. There are very few companies I'd fly out for TBH. IMO Make firing easier, pay people a massive severance if you're firing them for a mistake you made in hiring, and initially st…

If you won’t fly out for an interview you’re probably not that interested and the company probably shouldn’t be either. Pre-COVID this was absolutely the normal way interviews were conducted.

If I'm not that interested in a company, I won't waste my time to contact them (or pay attention to their efforts to contact me). Having interest in them does not imply that I have an interest in travel, however. If I had an interest in travel, I'd have become an airline pilot or something like that instead.

But if they think they need someone who has a secret desire to man a ship or be a touring musician – cool. A good fit isn't a good fit.

Re: Interviewing a software engineer who prepared with AI

#99

Post by ramesh31 »

imhoguy wrote: post #65
jorgesborges wrote: post #40

Despite how bad the job market seems at the moment it's things like this make me feel confident for when I have to search again.

This and many other cases are literally burning remote interviewing and offshore candidates. Soon, you will be able to find anything only thru local on-site interview or strong references. I guess this is your point.

>Soon, you will be able to find anything only thru local on-site interview or strong references.

Anyone paying attention has started planning accordingly for this over the last couple years. The remote work revolution has resolutely failed, and it's clear in retrospect it never had a chance.

Re: Interviewing a software engineer who prepared with AI

#100

Post by UncleOxidant »

no-dr-onboard wrote: post #45

I keep coming back to this phrase used in this post: "it was scary". Yeah, hiring is scary. Hiring is insanely expensive on all fronts. Firing people is difficult, it's expensive and legally exposing. Hiring the wrong person, allowing them access your systems and potentially exfiltrate your IP to them is a hazardous but necessary venture. The thing is, none of these things really changed with AI. People have been lyi…

> - And yeah, you guys, it's time to buy a suit.

No, business casual is just fine. Who wants to try to do a grueling technical interview in a suit? No thanks. I sweat enough as it is in interviews.

Post reply on HN