Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you don't solve the problem, do you get the job?
Depends on why you didn't solve it.
Never once has this happened
You did this with an AI and you do not understand what you're doing here
541–550 of 571 posts
Re: You did this with an AI and you do not understand what you're doing here
#542Crazy how he doubled down by just pasting badger's answer into Chat and submitting the (hilariously obvious AI) reply: > Thanks for the quick review. You’re right — my attached PoC does not exercise libcurl and therefore does not demonstrate a cURL bug. I retract the cookie overflow claim and apologize for the noise. Please close this report as invalid. If helpful, I can follow up separately with a minimal C reproduc…
At some point they told ChatGPT to put emoji's everywhere which is also a dead giveaway on the original report that it's AI. They're the new em dash.
It loves to put emojis in print statements, it's usually a red flag for me that something is written by AI.
Re: You did this with an AI and you do not understand what you're doing here
#543Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seems to me like people have to push back more directly with a collective effort; otherwise the incentives are all wrong.
What I don't get, is why people think this action has value. The maintainer of the project could ask an LLM to do that. A senior dev. I can't imagine Googling for something, seeing someone on (for example) stackoverflow commenting on code, and then filing a bug to the maintainer. And just copy and pasting what someone else said, into the bug report. All without even comprehending the code, the project, or even runnin…
> I remember in Asimov's Empire series of books, at one point a scientist wanted to study something.
Or "The Machine Stops" (1909):
> Those who still wanted to know what the earth was like had after all only to listen to some gramophone, or to look into some cinematophote.
> And even the lecturers acquiesced when they found that a lecture on the sea was none the less stimulating when compiled out of other lectures that had already been delivered on the same subject. “Beware of first-hand ideas!” exclaimed one of the most advanced of them. “First-hand ideas do not really exist. They are but the physical impressions produced by love and fear, and on this gross foundation who could erect a philosophy? Let your ideas be second-hand, and if possible tenth-hand, for then they will be far removed from that disturbing element — direct observation. [...]"
Re: You did this with an AI and you do not understand what you're doing here
#544This should be a t-shirt.
Re: You did this with an AI and you do not understand what you're doing here
#545Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have you watched All-In? Chamath Palihapitiya, who takes himself very seriously, is clearly just reading off something from ChatGPT most of the time. These Silicon Valley CEOs are hacks.
The word "hacks" is so charitable, when you could use "sociopaths". Russ Hanneman raised his kid with AI: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wGy5SGTuAGI&t=217s A company I'm funding, we call it The Lady. I press the button, and The Lady tells Aspen when it's time for bed, time to take a bath, when his fucking mother's here to pick him up. I get to be his friend, and she's the bad guy. I've disrupted fatherhood!
Involuntarily swore reading this.
Re: You did this with an AI and you do not understand what you're doing here
#546"I heard you were extremely quick at math" Me: "yes, as a matter of fact I am" Interviewer: "Whats 14x27" Me: "49" Interviewer: "that's not even close" me: "yeah, but it was fast"
This is one of my favourite images from a long-defunct proto-meme blog: https://entropicthoughts.com/image/doesntworkbutfast.jpg
Re: You did this with an AI and you do not understand what you're doing here
#547Given the stubbornness with which slop continued in the replies, I’m starting to doubt that this is actually part of an ongoing experiment with AI in vulnerability r&d.
Re: You did this with an AI and you do not understand what you're doing here
#548Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unfortunately that seems to be the norm now – people literally reduce themselves to a copy-paste mechanism.
To be honest, I do not understand this new norm. A few months ago I applied to an internal position. I was a NGO IT worker, deployed twice to emergency response operations, knew the policies & operations and had good relations with users and coworkers. The interview went well. I was honest. When asked what my weakness regarding this position I told that I am a good analyst but when it comes to writing new exploits, t…
This is not a new norm (LLM aside).
Old man time, providing unsolicited and unwelcome input…
My own way of viewing interviews: Treat interviews as one would view dating leading to marriage. Interviewing is a different skillset and experience than being on the job.
The dating analogue for your interview question would be something like: “Can you cook or make meals for yourself?”.
- Your answer: “No. I’m great in bed, but I’m a disaster in the kitchen”
- Alternative answer: “No. I’m great in bed; but I haven’t had a need to cook for myself or anyone else up until now. What sort of cooking did you have in mind?”
My question to you: Which ones leads to at least more conversation? Which one do you think comes off as a better prospect for family building?
Note: I hope this perspective shift helps you.
Re: You did this with an AI and you do not understand what you're doing here
#549Earlier quoted context omitted.
Depends on why you didn't solve it.
Never once has this happened
I've hired someone that didn't solve a specific technical problem.
If they are able to walk through what they are doing and it shows the capability to do the expected tasks, why would you exclude them for failing to 'solve' some specific task? We are generally hiring for overall capabilities, not the ability to solve one specific problem.
Generally my methodology for working through these kinds of things during hiring now days focuses more on the code review side of things. I started doing that 5+ years ago at this point. That's actually fortuitous given the fact that reviewing code in the age of AI Coding Assistants has become so much more important.
Anyway, a sample size of 1 here refutes the assertion that someone's never been hired even when failing to solve a technical interview problem. FWIW, they turned out to be an absolute beast of a developer when they joined the team.
Re: You did this with an AI and you do not understand what you're doing here
#550"I heard you were extremely quick at math" Me: "yes, as a matter of fact I am" Interviewer: "Whats 14x27" Me: "49" Interviewer: "that's not even close" me: "yeah, but it was fast"
There should be a language that uses "Almost-In-Time" compilation. If it runs out of time, it just gives a random answer.
AIighT