4 ms·

I'm glad ChatGPT could be the end of leetcode interviews. I worry though that it'll just be the end of online leetcode interviews and employers will bring peop

I'm glad ChatGPT could be the end of leetcode interviews. I worry though that it'll just be the end of online leetcode interviews and employers will bring people back into the office to interview.

zeta0134 3y ago
Would this necessarily be a bad thing? "In the office" could substitute for a video call. I always got the impression that a coding challenge during an interview was much less "did you memorize this solution in advance" and much more indirect, like "what is your general problem solving methodology, do you ask good questions, etc." Maybe I haven't been on the receiving end of enough bad interviews?
nottorp 3y ago
I wouldn't mind doing an interview face to face for a fully remote job :) The reverse, yes I would mind.
doctorpangloss 3y ago
They'll change the questions. No chance in hell leetcoding is going away. It will be even more important, with even greater ceremony. > employers will bring people back into the office to interview. Nothing stops people from getting the questions they'll be asked ahead of time from insiders, like their friends or a recruiter, which is really how people have been cheating. This is how it is possible to be Google and have identical standards for years but nonetheless observe overall quality of hires go down.
- timeagain 3y ago
  Based on my experience receiving the questions beforehand is not super likely. Getting other interviewers’ questions beforehand /as another interviewer in the loop/ is already like pulling teeth.
- nostromo 3y ago
  > They'll change the questions. No chance in hell leetcoding is going away. I'd take that bet. Leetcoding is something that GPT 4 is very good at doing -- and it does it faster than any engineer can type, let alone think.
- fragmede 3y ago
  > No chance in hell leetcoding is going away. Hopefully it does. If an LLM can do that, why should I have to do that, both in an interview or outside of one. LLM-assisted programming is where it's at, and there's no going back. Being able to do a leetcode isn't a good test of a candidate in the first place.
  - diarrhea 3y ago
    We didn’t have to invert binary trees outside interviews before LLMs either, yet leetCode is where it’s been at.
- sureglymop 3y ago
  It's also because one can study and grind amd optimize for leetcode. So it's really about who has the time, resources (and incentive to work for free) to really grind leetcode before the interview. In a way it's probably equivalent to students who just bang everything into their head before the semester exam and forget it all again two weeks after. (Not that that's a bad thing, it just doesn't really say anything about a candidate)
randmeerkat 3y ago
People are allowed to use Google in an interview, why not ChatGPT..? If you interview with a company that won’t let you use the tools you would use in your day job, it’s not somewhere worth working.
- Aurornis 3y ago
  I've hosted interviews where candidates can use Google to look up documentation and such. If I saw a candidate using Google or GitHub search to try to look up the entire solution then I'd stop them. That's missing the point.
- rTX5CMRXIfFG 3y ago
  > People are allowed to use Google in an interview I’m sorry but lol no. There are many places where you can’t do that in an interview because there are many employers that want to test for technical knowledge, not knowledge of tools, which anyone can learn on the job and which change as fast as fads come and go. I find this entire thread astounding in how so many people come in the defense of ignorance and outright incompetence. If ChatGPT responses were enough to do a job, then why would a company hire a human? There would be very little value add from a warm body than just paying for the ChatGPT API and automating integration. And corollary to that: if your job is possible to do with a huge number of AI tools, then your work is likely the menial kind and you should seriously dread being laid off and being obsoleted in the near future.
  - georgemcbay 3y ago
    I'm pretty skeptical of GPT/LLMs in general (I think they can be a fantastic tool, but I think their current abilities to generate creative solutions are wildly overblown even by a lot of people that should recognize their limitations better), but in response to this: > If ChatGPT responses were enough to do a job, then why would a company hire a human? By the same token if ChatGPT responses are enough to pass the interview, then how can you believe your interview process isn't fundamentally broken? And if ChatGPT responses aren't enough to pass the interview, then who cares if people use them? If the interview properly models the job being hired for those candidates should either fail the interview or not depending upon their ability to leap back and forth between the tool and their own ability to make use of its output which should map very well to their ability to do the same in an actual work capacity.
tayo42 3y ago
Maybe we can get like a certification authority and only leet code once in person instead of doing it 2 to 3 times for every company we interview with
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
devmor 3y ago
I dislike whiteboard interviews in general, but I personally don't particularly mind them if they're more of a pseudocode approach to "how would you solve this problem algorithmically" intended to show the interviewer your thought process, rather than the more common "do you know how to do fizzbuzz" type thing to check a box. I had an interview like this recently that was quite pleasant, where the interviewers and I ended up collaboratively solving the problem together because we all had different approaches - I think it had the unintended effect of demonstrating teamwork and helped the interview go quite positively.
Aurornis 3y ago
I've worked remote for many years. Anecdotally: During COVID when remote jobs started going mainstream, the number of weird and scammy applications we received spiked. We also had a couple problems with people joining remote but keeping their old jobs or getting a second job (discovered following investigation of their underperformance and inconsistent availability). When we started telling interview candidates that we'd fly them in and put them in a hotel for the last stage of the interview, most of the questionable candidates started dropping out of the interview pipeline by themselves. In many cases we didn't actually bother flying them out. Just the thought of having to come into the office for a single day was enough of a filter. Was it perfect? No, of course not. We had one candidate who couldn't be away from his family for medical reasons and we happily accommodated. We also had one hire who went through the whole process and proceeded to do almost no work at all for 6 months unless a manager was breathing down his neck at every step. But it cut down on the number of problem candidates massively.
- bitzun 3y ago
  > We also had one hire who went through the whole process and proceeded to do almost no work at all for 6 months unless a manager was breathing down his neck at every step. This unfortunately happened pretty often pre-pandemic/in-office. The majority of the teams I've worked on across a few companies have had one or more donothings. The bigger the team, the more unfocused management, the more likely to hang on.
- BeFlatXIII 3y ago
  > We also had a couple problems with people joining remote but keeping their old jobs or getting a second job (discovered following investigation of their underperformance and inconsistent availability). Don't feel bad about firing them: you were only ever their J2.
kjkjadksj 3y ago
If its an actual remote position then there’s no where to bring you in
iLoveOncall 3y ago
You know what the end of leetcode interviews looks like, right? It is the age of take-home assignments that take days to complete. Only absolutely incompetent people would want this over leetcode.

I'm glad ChatGPT could be the end of leetcode interviews. I worry though that it'll just be the end of online leetcode interviews and employers will bring people back into the office to interview.

zeta0134 3y ago

Would this necessarily be a bad thing? "In the office" could substitute for a video call. I always got the impression that a coding challenge during an interview was much less "did you memorize this solution in advance" and much more indirect, like "what is your general problem solving methodology, do you ask good questions, etc." Maybe I haven't been on the receiving end of enough bad interviews?

nottorp 3y ago

I wouldn't mind doing an interview face to face for a fully remote job :) The reverse, yes I would mind.

doctorpangloss 3y ago

They'll change the questions. No chance in hell leetcoding is going away. It will be even more important, with even greater ceremony. > employers will bring people back into the office to interview. Nothing stops people from getting the questions they'll be asked ahead of time from insiders, like their friends or a recruiter, which is really how people have been cheating. This is how it is possible to be Google and have identical standards for years but nonetheless observe overall quality of hires go down.

timeagain 3y ago
Based on my experience receiving the questions beforehand is not super likely. Getting other interviewers’ questions beforehand /as another interviewer in the loop/ is already like pulling teeth.
nostromo 3y ago
> They'll change the questions. No chance in hell leetcoding is going away. I'd take that bet. Leetcoding is something that GPT 4 is very good at doing -- and it does it faster than any engineer can type, let alone think.
fragmede 3y ago
> No chance in hell leetcoding is going away. Hopefully it does. If an LLM can do that, why should I have to do that, both in an interview or outside of one. LLM-assisted programming is where it's at, and there's no going back. Being able to do a leetcode isn't a good test of a candidate in the first place.
- diarrhea 3y ago
  We didn’t have to invert binary trees outside interviews before LLMs either, yet leetCode is where it’s been at.
sureglymop 3y ago
It's also because one can study and grind amd optimize for leetcode. So it's really about who has the time, resources (and incentive to work for free) to really grind leetcode before the interview. In a way it's probably equivalent to students who just bang everything into their head before the semester exam and forget it all again two weeks after. (Not that that's a bad thing, it just doesn't really say anything about a candidate)

randmeerkat 3y ago

People are allowed to use Google in an interview, why not ChatGPT..? If you interview with a company that won’t let you use the tools you would use in your day job, it’s not somewhere worth working.

Aurornis 3y ago
I've hosted interviews where candidates can use Google to look up documentation and such. If I saw a candidate using Google or GitHub search to try to look up the entire solution then I'd stop them. That's missing the point.
rTX5CMRXIfFG 3y ago
> People are allowed to use Google in an interview I’m sorry but lol no. There are many places where you can’t do that in an interview because there are many employers that want to test for technical knowledge, not knowledge of tools, which anyone can learn on the job and which change as fast as fads come and go. I find this entire thread astounding in how so many people come in the defense of ignorance and outright incompetence. If ChatGPT responses were enough to do a job, then why would a company hire a human? There would be very little value add from a warm body than just paying for the ChatGPT API and automating integration. And corollary to that: if your job is possible to do with a huge number of AI tools, then your work is likely the menial kind and you should seriously dread being laid off and being obsoleted in the near future.
- georgemcbay 3y ago
  I'm pretty skeptical of GPT/LLMs in general (I think they can be a fantastic tool, but I think their current abilities to generate creative solutions are wildly overblown even by a lot of people that should recognize their limitations better), but in response to this: > If ChatGPT responses were enough to do a job, then why would a company hire a human? By the same token if ChatGPT responses are enough to pass the interview, then how can you believe your interview process isn't fundamentally broken? And if ChatGPT responses aren't enough to pass the interview, then who cares if people use them? If the interview properly models the job being hired for those candidates should either fail the interview or not depending upon their ability to leap back and forth between the tool and their own ability to make use of its output which should map very well to their ability to do the same in an actual work capacity.

tayo42 3y ago

Maybe we can get like a certification authority and only leet code once in person instead of doing it 2 to 3 times for every company we interview with

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

devmor 3y ago

I dislike whiteboard interviews in general, but I personally don't particularly mind them if they're more of a pseudocode approach to "how would you solve this problem algorithmically" intended to show the interviewer your thought process, rather than the more common "do you know how to do fizzbuzz" type thing to check a box. I had an interview like this recently that was quite pleasant, where the interviewers and I ended up collaboratively solving the problem together because we all had different approaches - I think it had the unintended effect of demonstrating teamwork and helped the interview go quite positively.

Aurornis 3y ago

I've worked remote for many years. Anecdotally: During COVID when remote jobs started going mainstream, the number of weird and scammy applications we received spiked. We also had a couple problems with people joining remote but keeping their old jobs or getting a second job (discovered following investigation of their underperformance and inconsistent availability). When we started telling interview candidates that we'd fly them in and put them in a hotel for the last stage of the interview, most of the questionable candidates started dropping out of the interview pipeline by themselves. In many cases we didn't actually bother flying them out. Just the thought of having to come into the office for a single day was enough of a filter. Was it perfect? No, of course not. We had one candidate who couldn't be away from his family for medical reasons and we happily accommodated. We also had one hire who went through the whole process and proceeded to do almost no work at all for 6 months unless a manager was breathing down his neck at every step. But it cut down on the number of problem candidates massively.

bitzun 3y ago
> We also had one hire who went through the whole process and proceeded to do almost no work at all for 6 months unless a manager was breathing down his neck at every step. This unfortunately happened pretty often pre-pandemic/in-office. The majority of the teams I've worked on across a few companies have had one or more donothings. The bigger the team, the more unfocused management, the more likely to hang on.
BeFlatXIII 3y ago
> We also had a couple problems with people joining remote but keeping their old jobs or getting a second job (discovered following investigation of their underperformance and inconsistent availability). Don't feel bad about firing them: you were only ever their J2.

kjkjadksj 3y ago

If its an actual remote position then there’s no where to bring you in

iLoveOncall 3y ago

You know what the end of leetcode interviews looks like, right? It is the age of take-home assignments that take days to complete. Only absolutely incompetent people would want this over leetcode.