4 ms·
No, it's not what they want. If they wanted you to use a LLM then they would tell you that up front. It's also too new of a technology to be required anywhere.
by wakawaka28 3y ago
No, it's not what they want. If they wanted you to use a LLM then they would tell you that up front. It's also too new of a technology to be required anywhere. Hardly anyone I know is even trying LLMs to begin with. Then, what do you do if the interviewee gets garbage code out of the LLM and misses an error? An error that might be forgiven in a normal interview cannot be excused when you didn't even have to write the code. Technically, if the LLM did the coding for you, you might pass without even being able to read code. This is all like the same reason you can't use a laptop on an algebra exam... The tool might do 100% of the work and leave you having shown nothing of your own ability.
- osigurdson 3y ago>> No, it's not what they want It may not be what the interviewer wants, because they would like to keep using their old interviewing strategies. However, it is what the business wants (or should want, assuming they want the most effective employees).
- wakawaka28 3y agoIt's not about being attached to interview strategies. It's about the fact that some people only copy/paste and aren't effective up to basic standards. I bet you'd consider an answer pasted from Stack Overflow and misrepresented as original to be 100% ok too, but both are unacceptable.
- osigurdson 3y agoIt is important to focus on the intersection of human and machine intelligence. If you listen to the AI luminaries, the role of the human will be more like a manager so perhaps understanding the code may eventually become unnecessary. However, my own experience with LLMs so far is they do seem to have trouble getting fine details correct. Presumably it will change over time.