Live data from Hacker News

Interviewing a software engineer who prepared with AI

kapwing.com

271–280 of 731 posts

Re: Interviewing a software engineer who prepared with AI

#271
post #145
post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

What an arrogant, ableist thing to say. I hope you're not involved in recruitment. The world has changed. Location is not the barrier it was five years ago.

Location isn't. Verification that you aren't a North Korea agent or just plain fraud is.

Re: Interviewing a software engineer who prepared with AI

#272
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…

I've had situations where I submitted a take-home exercise, only for me to get feedback that it didn't match their required level. After some back & forth I was able to (politely) prove their feedback was not correct, which actually granted me a follow-up interview. Unfortunately, this was a unicorn, most companies don't give feedback, let alone admit they were wrong. But, take-home is preferred, I want to use my IDE…

    > Then there are take-home timed challenges on systems like hackerrank / leetcode etc, which are horrible in terms of accessibility and access. Not to mention that they are a pass/fail, and focus purely on speed, not quality.
This does not mirror my experience. Many times that I have interviewed with hackerrank/leetcode questions, I wasn't able to get all of the test cases to pass. After time was up, I explained my solution to the interviewer and talked about the failing test cases. Sometimes I passed the interview; and other times not. It was not binary: Imperfect means 100% fail.

Re: Interviewing a software engineer who prepared with AI

#273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've had situations where I submitted a take-home exercise, only for me to get feedback that it didn't match their required level. After some back & forth I was able to (politely) prove their feedback was not correct, which actually granted me a follow-up interview. Unfortunately, this was a unicorn, most companies don't give feedback, let alone admit they were wrong. But, take-home is preferred, I want to use my IDE…

>When an HVAC company hires a new tech HVAC has certifications you can get. We should strongly consider this in our industry. I don't think its an unreasonable compromise, especially now with the advent of LLMs.

    > We should strongly consider this in our industry.
These were very hot for system admins in the late 1990s and early 2000s. Is it still a thing today? Do high quality employers still care about these certs in 2025? I doubt it.

Re: Interviewing a software engineer who prepared with AI

#274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

A lot of folks (and good engineers) arent that career oriented.

Re: Interviewing a software engineer who prepared with AI

#275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are right about hiring not being that much different but your prognostications are way off IMO. > - people are probably going to have to fly out for interviews, again. Fly where? Many companies don't have offices anymore. > - awkward and/or neurodivergent people are going to have to learn social skills again. Ahh... the age old, "just do better" position for neurodivergent people. Classic bigotry. > - And yeah, y…

> Classic bigotry. Hiring is all about finding the best candidate. If you find you cannot function sitting in conference room with three other people for an hour, there is a 100% chance there is a better candidate suited for the role, even if his/her technical skills are less than yours. Jobs have soft skill requirements, and there is nothing bigoted about that.

> Hiring is all about finding the best candidate. If you find you cannot function sitting in conference room with three other people for an hour, there is a 100% chance there is a better candidate suited for the role, even if his/her technical skills are less than yours.

> Jobs have soft skill requirements, and there is nothing bigoted about that.

Everything you just said also applies to someone who's deaf, blind, or physically impaired.

Apply that same logic to someone with one of those conditions, and enjoy losing the discrimination lawsuit.

Re: Interviewing a software engineer who prepared with AI

#276
post #50
post #34

Incidentally, I really-really like that they asked questions based on the person's resume. That was typical before some students got handed a lot of dotcom boom money. (And then somehow most interviews throughout the industry became based on what a CS student with no experience thought professional software development was about. Then it became about everyone playing to the bad metrics and rituals that had been insti…

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".

That’s mental. Why have a resume in the first place then? Any info in the resume introduces “bias”. Well, actually, even wanting to hire the best candidate for a job is already a bias of its own.

So why not just have a lottery instead of a hiring process?

/s But only slightly.

Re: Interviewing a software engineer who prepared with AI

#277

AI definitely makes take homes and non live coding exercises less viable (and even live ones to an extent). Not my favorite AI driven change as I think live coding is so high pressure it can give wrong signals.

I agree that live coding is very hard on a lot of candidates. How do you feel about asking candidates to read code and explain it? I had that only once and I thought it was genuinely innovative. Even if I couldn't understand all of it, we can discuss various points about it.

Re: Interviewing a software engineer who prepared with AI

#278
post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the difference is that you used to need a certain knowledge to be able to bullshit. You could still do it, but it would mainly be to embellish stuff you already somewhat know. With LLMs, it's easy to make it write a whole page of interview prep you can use to hide your tracks, without any prior knowledge. My guess is they saw that kapwing wanted experience in X,Y,Z and made an LLM create projects that sounds…

From the article: > but it had been some time ago, and they never worked on any of the features It appears that the candidate might have actually worked on the daycare app, but not on what they said they worked - i.e., the ratelimiting and pagination. It appears that they might have been working on the frontend, and took the liberty of "expanding" their role - this used to be extremely common in a big sample of the r…

Well I guess if the candidate would be a little be stronger and actually trying to reason with the LLM about the decision it suggested, he would be better prepared and maybe got away with his claims.

Or as current best chess player Magnus Carlson said, "if I would cheat, you would never know". Meaning very strong candidates will get away with flexing the truth with AI. But this means maybe, you shouldn't look for a perfect fit. Or check his merit by spending time and money to get in touch with his old companies.

Re: Interviewing a software engineer who prepared with AI

#279

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…

Hm, it turns out suggesting that someone buy a suit for a job they need is a litmus test.

You've had multiple comments about orgs explicitly not hiring candidates that show up in suits, yet call it a "litmus test" if someone doesn't?

You sound like a typical classist MBA; don't you have Linkedin posts to make and employees to micromanage?

Re: Interviewing a software engineer who prepared with AI

#280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

A lot of folks (and good engineers) arent that career oriented.

I have to do a bragsheet now anyway and yeah like gritting teeth. It is documenting your job basically!
Post reply on HN