3 ms·

Are they just looking for AI skills? If so that's terrifying.

by adithyassekhar 8mo ago

tmountain 8mo ago
Probably, I think hand coding is going the way of the dodo and the ox cart.
- adithyassekhar 8mo ago
  Sorry but focusing on the hand coding part misses the whole picture and would derail the conversation. Comparisons like that are often dishonest. Hiring someone who writes Rust with Claude but never written anything with it in their lives, never faced the edge cases, never took the wrong decisions feels naive to me. At the end of the day it's still a next token generator, an impressive one. It can hold context but not relate with anything outside that context. Someone needs to take accountability.
ternwer 8mo ago
I think most are looking for both. AI/LLM knowledge without programming knowledge can make a mess. Programming knowledge without AI/LLM knowledge can also make a mess.
- palmotea 8mo ago
  > AI/LLM knowledge without programming knowledge can make a mess. That makes sense. > Programming knowledge without AI/LLM knowledge can also make a mess. How? I'd imagine that most typically means continuing to program by hand. But even someone like that would probably know enough to not mindlessly let an LLM agent go to town.
  - thepasch 8mo ago
    > How? I'd imagine that most typically means continuing to program by hand. I think the use of LLMs is assumed by that statement. The point is that even experienced programmers can get poor results if they're not aware of the tech's limitations and best-practices. It doesn't mean you get poor results by default. There is a lot of hype around the tech right now; plenty of it overblown, but a lot of it also perfectly warranted. It's not going to make you "ten times more productive" outside of maybe laying the very first building blocks on a green field; the infamous first 80% that only take 20% of the time anyway. But it does allow you to spend a lot more time designing and drafting, and a lot less time actually implementing, which, if you were spec-driven to begin with, has always been little more than a formality in the first place. For me, the actual mental work never happened while writing code; it happened well in advance. My workflow hasn't changed that much; I'm just not the one who writes the code anymore, but I'm still very much the one who designs it.
    - ternwer 8mo ago
      Yes, I've seen many people become _too_ hands-off after an initial success with LLMs, and get bitten by not understanding the system. Hirers, above, are more focused on the opposite side, though: engineers who try AI once, see a mess or hallucinations, and decide it's useless. There is some learning to figure out how to wield it.
  - column 8mo ago
    "How?" <- It shows a lack of curiosity? "probably know enough" <- that's exactly the point of the question, is the candidate clueless about AI/LLM.
    - palmotea 8mo ago
      > "How?" <- It shows a lack of curiosity? We're talking about a codebase, here. How does "lack of curiosity" about LLMS "make a mess" > "probably know enough" <- that's exactly the point of the question, is the candidate clueless about AI/LLM. Probably knows enough about what's a good vs bad change. If you're "clueless about AI/LLM" but know a bad change when you see one, how do you "make a mess?" It's 2026, even a developer who's never touched an LLM before has heard about LLM hallucinations. If you've got programming knowledge, you should know how to make changes (e.g. you're not going to commit 200 files for a tiny change, because you know that doesn't smell right), which should guard against "making a mess." My point it doesn't seem reasonable to assume symmetry here. That if you don't know both things, you'll make a mess. That also implies everything built before 2022 was a mess, because those developers new programming but not LLMs, which is an unreasonable claim to make.
      - ternwer 8mo ago
        I was too cute in trying to be terse, but I meant a mess while using AI: > [Employers], above, are more focused on the opposite side, though: engineers who try AI once, see a mess or hallucinations, and decide it's useless. There is some learning to figure out how to wield it.
AlexeyBelov 8mo ago
The usual LeetCode-ish tasks, often system design, but then deep AI usage. "I use Copilot" isn't going to fly at all, as far as I understand.
- nDRDY 8mo ago
  Are you allowed to leverage AI to answer the leetcode questions? Otherwise, it seems it is the interviewers who are behind the times!

Are they just looking for AI skills? If so that's terrifying.

tmountain 8mo ago

Probably, I think hand coding is going the way of the dodo and the ox cart.

adithyassekhar 8mo ago
Sorry but focusing on the hand coding part misses the whole picture and would derail the conversation. Comparisons like that are often dishonest. Hiring someone who writes Rust with Claude but never written anything with it in their lives, never faced the edge cases, never took the wrong decisions feels naive to me. At the end of the day it's still a next token generator, an impressive one. It can hold context but not relate with anything outside that context. Someone needs to take accountability.

ternwer 8mo ago

I think most are looking for both. AI/LLM knowledge without programming knowledge can make a mess. Programming knowledge without AI/LLM knowledge can also make a mess.

palmotea 8mo ago
> AI/LLM knowledge without programming knowledge can make a mess. That makes sense. > Programming knowledge without AI/LLM knowledge can also make a mess. How? I'd imagine that most typically means continuing to program by hand. But even someone like that would probably know enough to not mindlessly let an LLM agent go to town.
- thepasch 8mo ago
  > How? I'd imagine that most typically means continuing to program by hand. I think the use of LLMs is assumed by that statement. The point is that even experienced programmers can get poor results if they're not aware of the tech's limitations and best-practices. It doesn't mean you get poor results by default. There is a lot of hype around the tech right now; plenty of it overblown, but a lot of it also perfectly warranted. It's not going to make you "ten times more productive" outside of maybe laying the very first building blocks on a green field; the infamous first 80% that only take 20% of the time anyway. But it does allow you to spend a lot more time designing and drafting, and a lot less time actually implementing, which, if you were spec-driven to begin with, has always been little more than a formality in the first place. For me, the actual mental work never happened while writing code; it happened well in advance. My workflow hasn't changed that much; I'm just not the one who writes the code anymore, but I'm still very much the one who designs it.
  - ternwer 8mo ago
    Yes, I've seen many people become _too_ hands-off after an initial success with LLMs, and get bitten by not understanding the system. Hirers, above, are more focused on the opposite side, though: engineers who try AI once, see a mess or hallucinations, and decide it's useless. There is some learning to figure out how to wield it.
- column 8mo ago
  "How?" <- It shows a lack of curiosity? "probably know enough" <- that's exactly the point of the question, is the candidate clueless about AI/LLM.
  - palmotea 8mo ago
    > "How?" <- It shows a lack of curiosity? We're talking about a codebase, here. How does "lack of curiosity" about LLMS "make a mess" > "probably know enough" <- that's exactly the point of the question, is the candidate clueless about AI/LLM. Probably knows enough about what's a good vs bad change. If you're "clueless about AI/LLM" but know a bad change when you see one, how do you "make a mess?" It's 2026, even a developer who's never touched an LLM before has heard about LLM hallucinations. If you've got programming knowledge, you should know how to make changes (e.g. you're not going to commit 200 files for a tiny change, because you know that doesn't smell right), which should guard against "making a mess." My point it doesn't seem reasonable to assume symmetry here. That if you don't know both things, you'll make a mess. That also implies everything built before 2022 was a mess, because those developers new programming but not LLMs, which is an unreasonable claim to make.
    - ternwer 8mo ago
      I was too cute in trying to be terse, but I meant a mess while using AI: > [Employers], above, are more focused on the opposite side, though: engineers who try AI once, see a mess or hallucinations, and decide it's useless. There is some learning to figure out how to wield it.

AlexeyBelov 8mo ago

The usual LeetCode-ish tasks, often system design, but then deep AI usage. "I use Copilot" isn't going to fly at all, as far as I understand.

nDRDY 8mo ago
Are you allowed to leverage AI to answer the leetcode questions? Otherwise, it seems it is the interviewers who are behind the times!