4 ms·

>Technical interviews are much harder today than they used to be. Engineers study for months and routinely get down-leveled despite that. Is this because of an

>Technical interviews are much harder today than they used to be. Engineers study for months and routinely get down-leveled despite that. Is this because of an interview prep arms race, or supply and demand, or what? Is all of that interview prep, and higher standards for hiring, translating into developers who are stronger on the job? Or at least, stronger when the job calls for data structure skill?

michael_mroczka 2y ago
Hey there, I'm the Mike (an author of BCtCI). I totally get where you’re coming from—there are a lot of flaws in the interview process, no doubt about it. When Cracking the Coding Interview was originally written, the intention wasn’t to claim, it as a perfect process and to give ideal questions that should be asked. In fact, there are many questions in the original book that I wouldn’t recommend any interviewer use. The real purpose was to shed light on a process that had been shrouded in secrecy for decades, long before the book existed. The reality is, like them or not, these types of interviews aren’t going anywhere—whether or not resources like mine are available. So the real question becomes: Should the process remain some insider-only system where only those with well-connected friends know what to expect and how to prepare? Or should we make it more accessible, ensuring that everyone has a fair shot with similar resources? For me, the answer is clear: transparency and equal access for all. It’s not about endorsing the process—it’s about making sure the playing field is level.
- 0xDEAFBEAD 2y ago
  That's fair. I didn't mean to condemn you. Sorry if it came across that way. Honestly I was just curious. I'm in the (apparent minority) of devs who actually like solving leetcode-style problems, so the current system doesn't bother me a ton. I wrote a reply to Aline which applies to you as well: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43145953 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43145953
  - michael_mroczka 2y ago
    Nah, I totally understand where you're coming from and didn't feel attacked. I responded to your reply! :)
- dblohm7 2y ago
  Great comment, Mike, and thank you! It really resonates with me because during my university years, I myself had a poor social network. As soon as I started interviewing, I was like, “WTF is this?!” whereas some better connected peers seemed to somehow “just know” how to be prepared to interview. There definitely wasn’t equal access. Thanks for trying to make things better!
leeny 2y ago
Hey, my name is Aline. I'm one of the authors of Beyond Cracking the Coding Interview and the founder of interviewing.io. I have also wondered about the arms race and how it weighs against market forces for the bar going up, especially because as founder of an interview prep platform, I am complicit in said arms race and don't feel great about it (though I think the good of starting interviewing.io far outweighs the bad, but that's a story for another time). So I looked at the data. Between 2015 and the first half of 2022, I'd argue that "the bar" was about the same, even though a bunch of interview prep resources sprung up during that time (interviewing.io was founded in 2015, Leetcode was, Pramp was, Triplebyte was, HackerRank was a few years earlier, the list goes on). Then, the tech downturn happened in 2022, and all of a sudden the bar jumped... because for the first time companies didn't feel like there was an acute shortage of candidates. Here's some the data about the bar. At interviewing.io, after each interview, whether it's mock or real, the interviewer fills out a rubric. The rubric asks whether you'd move the candidate forward and also asks to rate them on a scale of 1 to 4 on coding ability, problem solving ability, and communication. We can look at what the average coding score was over time for passing interviews to see how much the bar has gone up. Between 2016 and 2022, the bar grew a bit (from 3.3 to 3.4). Starting in 2022, it shot up to 3.7. Is this the be-all and end-all? Of course not. But to me this is compelling data that market forces >>> the interview prep industry.
- 0xDEAFBEAD 2y ago
  Hi Aline, thanks for the reply. That makes a lot of sense. Even so, I do think it's worth considering what someone in your position can do to make things better. If an arms race is inevitable, can it at least be an arms race with positive externalities? For example, if companies focused much more on security questions during interviews, that would create an incentive for devs to learn about security. Then we'd have more secure software as a positive externality -- in theory, at least. If we could get companies to ask more questions about AI alignment, that could reduce risks from AI misalignment. If we could get companies to ask more questions about optimizing the energy usage of apps and data centers, that could be good for the environment. The pitch to hiring managers would be something like: The algorithms interview is not about algorithms per se. Algorithm knowledge is only somewhat useful on the job. Rather, the algorithms interview is about giving the candidate a chance to signal that they can master technical coding knowledge. It doesn't particularly matter what that technical coding knowledge is. And, if you ask questions on topic besides the classic data structures and algorithms, that means you're measuring something different: * You're measuring the candidate's passion to learn CS stuff that's not usually covered in interviews. * You're measuring the candidate's ability to pick up something new on the fly. * If you're transparent, and you publicize the topic(s) you interview for, you're measuring the candidate's passion for getting hired at your company in particular. All of those measurements seem potentially more valuable than measuring how much time they had to study classic algorithms topics.
flashgordon 2y ago
So another one to consider: It is not about a "higher" bar as much as a more "standardized" bar and more importantly to weed out the "uncompliant" ones. Leetcoding style preparation is pretty much a 2-3 hour a day over 1-2 months ordeal (given or take). Which means those who are seeking the types who have the time to invest in this repeatedly. This translates your willingness to be part of the time no questions asked. Worse this is not one off. No matter your expertise/experience level, unless you are doing this everyday for fun, you need to invest to stay sharp. Guess how many family folks actually have this kind of time? I consider myself a reasonably experienced engineer -both from a ton of side projects for fun and with long stints at faangs + being on both sides of the interview table (note I said experienced, not "great") and i still have to devote 2-3 weeks of ~4 hours each day leetcoding each time I change roles. Would be impossible if family wasn't so forgiving! Back to your point. These kind of interviews have little to do with bar and more about companies know they can put you through it and to hire those who are willing to give it all up for the co! They don't want (or know what to do with) the next woz. Someone who will follow the rubrics will do.

michael_mroczka 2y ago

Hey there, I'm the Mike (an author of BCtCI). I totally get where you’re coming from—there are a lot of flaws in the interview process, no doubt about it. When Cracking the Coding Interview was originally written, the intention wasn’t to claim, it as a perfect process and to give ideal questions that should be asked. In fact, there are many questions in the original book that I wouldn’t recommend any interviewer use. The real purpose was to shed light on a process that had been shrouded in secrecy for decades, long before the book existed. The reality is, like them or not, these types of interviews aren’t going anywhere—whether or not resources like mine are available. So the real question becomes: Should the process remain some insider-only system where only those with well-connected friends know what to expect and how to prepare? Or should we make it more accessible, ensuring that everyone has a fair shot with similar resources? For me, the answer is clear: transparency and equal access for all. It’s not about endorsing the process—it’s about making sure the playing field is level.

0xDEAFBEAD 2y ago
That's fair. I didn't mean to condemn you. Sorry if it came across that way. Honestly I was just curious. I'm in the (apparent minority) of devs who actually like solving leetcode-style problems, so the current system doesn't bother me a ton. I wrote a reply to Aline which applies to you as well: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43145953 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43145953
- michael_mroczka 2y ago
  Nah, I totally understand where you're coming from and didn't feel attacked. I responded to your reply! :)
dblohm7 2y ago
Great comment, Mike, and thank you! It really resonates with me because during my university years, I myself had a poor social network. As soon as I started interviewing, I was like, “WTF is this?!” whereas some better connected peers seemed to somehow “just know” how to be prepared to interview. There definitely wasn’t equal access. Thanks for trying to make things better!

leeny 2y ago

Hey, my name is Aline. I'm one of the authors of Beyond Cracking the Coding Interview and the founder of interviewing.io. I have also wondered about the arms race and how it weighs against market forces for the bar going up, especially because as founder of an interview prep platform, I am complicit in said arms race and don't feel great about it (though I think the good of starting interviewing.io far outweighs the bad, but that's a story for another time). So I looked at the data. Between 2015 and the first half of 2022, I'd argue that "the bar" was about the same, even though a bunch of interview prep resources sprung up during that time (interviewing.io was founded in 2015, Leetcode was, Pramp was, Triplebyte was, HackerRank was a few years earlier, the list goes on). Then, the tech downturn happened in 2022, and all of a sudden the bar jumped... because for the first time companies didn't feel like there was an acute shortage of candidates. Here's some the data about the bar. At interviewing.io, after each interview, whether it's mock or real, the interviewer fills out a rubric. The rubric asks whether you'd move the candidate forward and also asks to rate them on a scale of 1 to 4 on coding ability, problem solving ability, and communication. We can look at what the average coding score was over time for passing interviews to see how much the bar has gone up. Between 2016 and 2022, the bar grew a bit (from 3.3 to 3.4). Starting in 2022, it shot up to 3.7. Is this the be-all and end-all? Of course not. But to me this is compelling data that market forces >>> the interview prep industry.

0xDEAFBEAD 2y ago
Hi Aline, thanks for the reply. That makes a lot of sense. Even so, I do think it's worth considering what someone in your position can do to make things better. If an arms race is inevitable, can it at least be an arms race with positive externalities? For example, if companies focused much more on security questions during interviews, that would create an incentive for devs to learn about security. Then we'd have more secure software as a positive externality -- in theory, at least. If we could get companies to ask more questions about AI alignment, that could reduce risks from AI misalignment. If we could get companies to ask more questions about optimizing the energy usage of apps and data centers, that could be good for the environment. The pitch to hiring managers would be something like: The algorithms interview is not about algorithms per se. Algorithm knowledge is only somewhat useful on the job. Rather, the algorithms interview is about giving the candidate a chance to signal that they can master technical coding knowledge. It doesn't particularly matter what that technical coding knowledge is. And, if you ask questions on topic besides the classic data structures and algorithms, that means you're measuring something different: * You're measuring the candidate's passion to learn CS stuff that's not usually covered in interviews. * You're measuring the candidate's ability to pick up something new on the fly. * If you're transparent, and you publicize the topic(s) you interview for, you're measuring the candidate's passion for getting hired at your company in particular. All of those measurements seem potentially more valuable than measuring how much time they had to study classic algorithms topics.

flashgordon 2y ago

So another one to consider: It is not about a "higher" bar as much as a more "standardized" bar and more importantly to weed out the "uncompliant" ones. Leetcoding style preparation is pretty much a 2-3 hour a day over 1-2 months ordeal (given or take). Which means those who are seeking the types who have the time to invest in this repeatedly. This translates your willingness to be part of the time no questions asked. Worse this is not one off. No matter your expertise/experience level, unless you are doing this everyday for fun, you need to invest to stay sharp. Guess how many family folks actually have this kind of time? I consider myself a reasonably experienced engineer -both from a ton of side projects for fun and with long stints at faangs + being on both sides of the interview table (note I said experienced, not "great") and i still have to devote 2-3 weeks of ~4 hours each day leetcoding each time I change roles. Would be impossible if family wasn't so forgiving! Back to your point. These kind of interviews have little to do with bar and more about companies know they can put you through it and to hire those who are willing to give it all up for the co! They don't want (or know what to do with) the next woz. Someone who will follow the rubrics will do.