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

471–480 of 651 posts

Re: AI killed the tech interview. Now what?

#471

Post by mixmastamyk »

williamdclt wrote: post #235
ramon156 wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people have still written code for school or a hobby project. Maybe I'm missing empathy, but I cannot understand how some developers have no code to show. If that's the case however, just let them make a small project over the weekend and then do another interview where you ask stuff about what they've made. It's not that deep

> Most people have still written code for school or a hobby project School was years and years ago, and has nothing to do with my current skills. From the people i personally know, most do _not_ have a hobby project, even fewer have hobby projects that showcases their technical skills. Nor should they be expected to. Most people have non-programming hobbies. > I cannot understand how some developers have no code to s…

If you're not interested, you're not interested. Not even about "passion" at that point, but the bare minimum interest in your industry. I said it better previously: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15553482

Re: AI killed the tech interview. Now what?

#472

Post by qudat »

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,…

> You never failed to know within a few minutes whether the person could do the job

Then why spend a couple hours?

Re: AI killed the tech interview. Now what?

#473

Post by codr7 »

xmx98 wrote: post #460
codr7 wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hehe, I have to remember to bring one of my custom Forths to the next interview.

As an interviewer I’d just skip the questions and talk about your Forth haha

Even better :)

I have yet to come across an interviewer who has a clue about anything that interests me.

Re: AI killed the tech interview. Now what?

#474

Post by codr7 »

solarmist wrote: post #464
codr7 wrote: post #456

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only way to test actual work is to do actual work, should be obvious but here we are.

It is obvious, but it’s also very time-consuming. You can’t solve ambiguous open ended problems in a set amount of time while being watched closely.

I'm not talking about being watched closely, I'm talking about regular work and then making a decision. You have to leave people space to do their thing if you want to see what they're capable of.

Re: AI killed the tech interview. Now what?

#475

Post by codr7 »

ghaff wrote: post #466
codr7 wrote: post #461

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Employers trying to hire for fit and culture has resulted in the most inhumane and counterproductive processes I've witnessed. If that's what you really want to do, let the person work for at least a month in the team.

Provisional hires (which often exist in theory but they're pretty much a formality in general) don't work for the most part. Lot of overhead for the company. And in many cases you're asking for the candidate to quit a job and possibly relocate on the possibility they'll get a new position assuming that they click in a short time interval.

So, accept the overhead as the cost of hiring the right people?

Re: AI killed the tech interview. Now what?

#476

Post by jwmoz »

None of this makes any sense. Why should I complete a tech test interview if I have 15 years of experience at X top firm? I would have done it already anyway.

I had a ‘principal engineer’ at last place who grinded leetcode for 100 days and still failed a leetcode interview. It’s utter nonsense.

A conversation with technical questions and topics should suffice. Hire fast and fire people.

Re: AI killed the tech interview. Now what?

#477

Post by qudat »

michaelt wrote: post #217
perlgeek wrote: post #132

Company A wants to hire an engineer, an AI could solve all their tech interview questions, so why not hire that AI instead? There's very likely a real answer to that question, and that answer should shape the way that engineer should be assessed and hired. For example, it could be that the company wants the engineer to do some kind of assessment whether a feature should be implemented at all, and if yes, in what way.…

> Company A wants to hire an engineer, an AI could solve all their tech interview questions, so why not hire that AI instead? Interview coding questions aren't like the day-to-day job, because of the nature of an interview. In an hour-long interview, I have to be able to state the problem in a way the candidate can understand, within 10 minutes or so. We don't have time for a lecture on the intricacies of voucher cal…

> In an hour-long interview, I have to be able to state the problem in a way the candidate can understand, within 10 minutes or so. We don't have time for a lecture on the intricacies of voucher calculation and global sales tax law.

Proving if they are technically capable of a job seems rather silly. Look at their resume, look at their online works, ask them questions about it. Use probing questions to understand the depths of their knowledge. I don't get why we are over-engineering interviews. If I have 10+ years of experience with some proof through chatting that I am, in fact, a professional software engineer, isn't that enough?

Re: AI killed the tech interview. Now what?

#478

Post by firstplacelast »

marcosdumay wrote: post #427
samr71 wrote: post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do we have different definitions of "marginally qualified"? Idk, I feel I'm a decent engineer - I can certainly do whatever leetcode medium they throw at me, as much as this counts of anything - and can actually code, but I still get maybe 1 callback per 50 applications. Does "marginally qualified" mean "Ivy League Competitive Programmer PhD" or something?

The GP is still passing through hundreds of people, dozens of them capable, until he reaches somebody that convinces him of their competence. You were passed down because you weren't convincing enough. Or maybe he is getting resumes from a channel that has been victim of machine-gun filling, and there indeed thousands of incompetent people posting resumes into every channel and just half a dozen real applicants. TBF,…

Big companies and small need to agree on some standards and create qualifying exams that they will actually accept as proof of competence. Degrees somehow don't prove anything, experience doesn't, blah blah blah. It's exhausting to have to prove to interviewers that I'm not mentally disabled at every turn and it's a waste of time for everyone.

Create certifications that actually count for something and aren't just a blip on a resume that may tick a box, but will actually move you past technical trivia questions. I know some people have a deep repulsion to this and I think it would be fine to have a technical interview gauntlet for those that choose not to engage with any type of certification and a simplified interview format for those that have passed the prerequisite tests.

I don't care how long, rigorous, or ridiculous the tests are. Just agree on some effing standard.

Re: AI killed the tech interview. Now what?

#479

Post by bpicolo »

ryandrake wrote: post #470
jimbokun wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

The equipment is irrelevant. What other career out there expects that practitioners also perform the work at home during their free time as a hobby?

I realize it's a rhetorical question, but pretty much everybody in the arts? I'd be very surprised to find a professional musician that doesn't play as a hobby.
Post reply on HN