161–170 of 394 posts
[flagged]
Would you prefer C or C++?
"2) AI companies are content with slop and do not even bother with clear problem statements."
It's a filter. If you don't get the problem, you'll waste their time.
"3) LOC and appearance matter, not goals or correctness."
The task was goal+correctness.
"4) Anthropic must be a horrible place to work at."
Depends on what you do. For this position it's probably one of the best companies to work at.
Is it "write 20 astroturfing but somewhat believable posts about the merits of "AI" and how it is going to replace humans"?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But now the meaning is different: you went from a potential interview to a guaranteed one.
No fucking shit, I paraphrased Anthropic's comments as > do better than we have publicly admitted most of humanity can do, and we may deign to interview you If you think telling someone that after passing a test that 99.999% of humanity cannot pass, that they _may_ get an interview, you are being snarky/condescending.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But now the meaning is different: you went from a potential interview to a guaranteed one.
No fucking shit, I paraphrased Anthropic's comments as > do better than we have publicly admitted most of humanity can do, and we may deign to interview you If you think telling someone that after passing a test that 99.999% of humanity cannot pass, that they _may_ get an interview, you are being snarky/condescending.
You may want to consider the distribution and quantity of replies before stating that you WILL do something that might just waste more people’s time or not be practical.
The classy thing to do would be responding to every qualifying submission, even if it’s just to thank everyone and let some people know the field was very competitive if an interview won’t be happening.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm 30 years in, and literally don't understand the question.
The question isn't clearly written down anywhere, that's why. Presumably actual candidates would have been given more info over the phone or email. Part of the "challenge" is reverse engineering their Python; unclear if that's intentional. If you look at the top of perf_takehome.py then there is a brief comment saying the challenge is to optimize a kernel. Kernel in GPU land means a program that computes on data in p…
Naively tested a set of agents on this task. Each ran the same spec headlessly in their native harness (one shot). Results: Agent Cycles Time ───────────────────────────────────────────── gpt-5-2 2,124 16m claude-opus-4-5-20251101 4,973 1h 2m gpt-5-1-codex-max-xhigh 5,402 34m gpt-5-codex 5,486 7m gpt-5-1-codex 12,453 8m gpt-5-2-codex 12,905 6m gpt-5-1-codex-mini 17,480 7m claude-sonnet-4-5-20250929 21,054 10m claude-…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But now the meaning is different: you went from a potential interview to a guaranteed one.
No fucking shit, I paraphrased Anthropic's comments as > do better than we have publicly admitted most of humanity can do, and we may deign to interview you If you think telling someone that after passing a test that 99.999% of humanity cannot pass, that they _may_ get an interview, you are being snarky/condescending.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My point still stands. I don't know what the LLM is doing so my guess is it's cheating unless there is evidence to the contrary.
Why do you assume it’s cheating?