4 ms·

If ChatGPT can solve your questions what does that say about your questions? That they don't assess the skillet you care about. If your questions were useful an

If ChatGPT can solve your questions what does that say about your questions? That they don't assess the skillet you care about. If your questions were useful and actually tested for the skillet you cared about and ChatGPT solves them, why not just use ChatGPT instead of hiring someone? By your definition, it would make a great employee! So what's the problem? Your interview process.

jstx1 4y ago
> If ChatGPT can solve your questions what does that say about your questions? That they don't assess the skillet you care about. Why not? Why does a machine being able to pass a test take away from the usefulness of the test when applied to a human?
- mudrockbestgirl 4y ago
  Did you read the rest of my comment? If the test was good and the machine passes, that means you could just hire the machine instead and wouldn't need to complain about it. You'd be happy because that's much cheaper than hiring a human. But presumably the op thinks the machine is not good enough to replace a developer. But it passed the interview... so doesn't that mean the interview question was bad?
  - jstx1 4y ago
    > that means you could just hire the machine instead and wouldn't need to complain about it. No, it doesn't. You're assuming that the test and the job are the same thing which they don't have to be. My point is that you can have tests that are different from the job itself which are still useful tests. Then you don't care whether a large language model can pass the test too.
    - mudrockbestgirl 4y ago
      You're right, I'm assuming that the interview should resemble the knowledge needed in the actual job as much as possible. Maybe there are exceptions but I think that's a pretty fair assumption. I think that's the reason why so many people hate whiteboarding interviews. They are not close to the job.
bironran 4y ago
Interviews are prediction machine that answer the question “will the candidate be successful (technical, design, soft skills, team integration…) in the role over time. The prediction is made with an extremely small sample, a few hours at most compared to months or year of training and employment. Considering that, of course the interview won’t be a slice of real work - there just isn’t enough time. We try to compress the software development experience of months to an hour - so it gets lossy. That’s why, in the interview, we gloss over details that we won’t in real life. Which is where ChatGPT’s answer really excel. Sure, it won’t really be able to design and code the system. But it can mimic knowing how to do it for the purpose of the test quite well.

jstx1 4y ago

> If ChatGPT can solve your questions what does that say about your questions? That they don't assess the skillet you care about. Why not? Why does a machine being able to pass a test take away from the usefulness of the test when applied to a human?

mudrockbestgirl 4y ago
Did you read the rest of my comment? If the test was good and the machine passes, that means you could just hire the machine instead and wouldn't need to complain about it. You'd be happy because that's much cheaper than hiring a human. But presumably the op thinks the machine is not good enough to replace a developer. But it passed the interview... so doesn't that mean the interview question was bad?
- jstx1 4y ago
  > that means you could just hire the machine instead and wouldn't need to complain about it. No, it doesn't. You're assuming that the test and the job are the same thing which they don't have to be. My point is that you can have tests that are different from the job itself which are still useful tests. Then you don't care whether a large language model can pass the test too.
  - mudrockbestgirl 4y ago
    You're right, I'm assuming that the interview should resemble the knowledge needed in the actual job as much as possible. Maybe there are exceptions but I think that's a pretty fair assumption. I think that's the reason why so many people hate whiteboarding interviews. They are not close to the job.

bironran 4y ago

Interviews are prediction machine that answer the question “will the candidate be successful (technical, design, soft skills, team integration…) in the role over time. The prediction is made with an extremely small sample, a few hours at most compared to months or year of training and employment. Considering that, of course the interview won’t be a slice of real work - there just isn’t enough time. We try to compress the software development experience of months to an hour - so it gets lossy. That’s why, in the interview, we gloss over details that we won’t in real life. Which is where ChatGPT’s answer really excel. Sure, it won’t really be able to design and code the system. But it can mimic knowing how to do it for the purpose of the test quite well.