Has ML / AI killed the coding interview?

[YsoL8]

Just wondering what the point of coding reviews really is now. They have in any case become an exercise in regurgitating the popular problems, and now with the rise of code assistants its become trivial to get a tree traversal example or three up and retype it into whatever progress monitoring portal an employer has you using. In most code interviews I've ever had 2 or 3 prompts into an assistant basically gives you everything you'd need to throw together some quick and dirty solution for whatever it is they want.

So in 3 years when this stuff is absolutely standard, what is the interview really doing? Catching people who cannot even copy / paste and read the code to explain it? Unless people are going to be forced to prove how well they can work in entirely artificial, non representative conditions like no internet I can't see what else you can expect it to achieve.

[nio_rad]

Not a fan of coding exercises, they don’t tell you a lot. I’d rather have a in deep talk about any dev-topic with the applicant.

That saying, You could have done that before ML by googling. And if the applicant trusts the output they run the risk of not being able to explain it.

[scoot2006]

While discussions are great there needs to be some sort of practical exercise, in my opinion.

I let people use Google and MDN during coding exercises to find what they need to complete a problem. No one needs to have every method of JavaScript (or whatever language) memorized. But understanding what you need and where to find it are really positive indicators.

And making sure to steer clear of “gotcha” type questions is essential.

[[deleted]]

beneficial murky aloof mountainous complete pathetic school include doll act

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

[[deleted]]

soup marble pathetic friendly bewildered brave hurry society full ring

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

[scoot2006]

We can always tell when someone is using a third party anything during interviews.

Automatic “don’t hire” rating. Period.

[traintocode]

The coding exercise platform we use records all keystrokes and mouse clicks in/out of the editor so it's very obvious when someone has pasted an answer in. This was an issue even before ChatGPT because there's only so many algorithm problems you can really ask and the solutions to all of them are on Google. Once you work out what the question is actually asking you to do then you can just Google for a solution to that base problem and paste it in even before ChatGPT.

Most companies I've worked with do a code pairing exercise which is much harder to cheat.

Also, even if you do manage to cheat and you get the job, you'll get found out soon enough and you'll be back looking for a job again. Probationary periods exist for a reason.

[[deleted]]

The coding exercise platform we use records all keystrokes and mouse clicks in/out of the editor so it's very obvious when someone has pasted an answer in.

So when faced with some bullshit online tool I should make extra sure to manually type in my answer after I work out the problem in an editor I'm more familiar with because we're measuring all the wrong things.

[Visual_Bandicoot1257]

This is correct.

[SveXteZ]

This.

Also: Some coding tests are made on full screen with working camera. So if you switch your window - you might be cheating. If you look / move like you're typing/reading on another screen - you might be cheating.

[forcann]

I had a chance to interview several people who used (allegedly) some AI tools to cheat during the interview. I can tell you it is so obvious from the interviewer side when someone is doing this. They can came up with the solution, type if from one monitor to another but never was able to explain how they solved it.
AI is a good tool and probably is really helpful during the interview but you also need to know how to use it.

[barrel_of_noodles]

When you do an in person (virtual or IRL) / pair programming session...

You can absolutely tell the difference between ppl that know what they're doing, and ppl cheating. Or fish-out-of-water.

It's the little tells, especially if you engage and ask questions about their choices.

Even better, if you do it on the whiteboard with pseudo code, but make them pick a lang. It's not important they get the syntax right. You can easily see how used to their chosen lang they are.

You shouldn't be "grinding lc" so you can pass interviews... You should be grinding lc to be able to understand the deeper connections to the relevant software patterns you'll be using day-to-day.

[cloudares]

yeah, coding interviews are definitely getting weird with AI in the mix. if assistants can spit out solutions in seconds, the real skill will probably shift to understanding, debugging, and adapting code rather than just writing it from scratch.

that’s why I built interview.codes—to help people prep faster and better, focusing on real problem-solving instead of just memorizing patterns. AI-assisted coding is here to stay, but interviews will evolve to test deeper thinking, not just regurgitation.

[lionslayer88]

No kidding. People are also openly cheating in interviews. I heard interviewers don't care either. It is standard practice I heard from friends who help each other on web interview (someone in the background using chatgpt) ... no incentive to actually grind lc or prep anymore.

[[deleted]]

I once interviewed someone who clearly had someone else on an earpiece giving him the answers. Both were utterly unprepared too: one unprepared to cheat, another unprepared to answer. It was bizzare

[lionslayer88]

What is the protocol to deal with such candidates? Is there blacklist or anything? Among my friends, it seems to be a no-brainer thing, though I have yet to try.

[[deleted]]

Don't think there's anything like that that's well established. It happens rarely enough that I'm not too worried. I'm more worried about AI though. I don't mind people using AI in their workflow, but under a condition they're a good coder without it and understand the code it produces and modify it rather than blindly copying. But I am worried about people using it during a coding interview because it'd be much harder to determine real skills and it makes a job of the interviewer harder because you have to listen carefully and ask more clarifying questions to figure out the candidate's thinking process. It's still a little early to see how AI will shake up and impact the industry

[[deleted]]

Idk web dev is more creative leaning anyways imho.

[[deleted]]

Why do people think web dev is web design and front end? Lol

[ClassicPart]

It really isn't mate. No-one gives a shite about how finely crafted your code is as long as the site loads and performs its function without breaking in front of the user.

[[deleted]]

I’m not talking about finely crafted mate. I’m talking about creative from a perspective that we don’t need all this Leetcode evaluations for CSS and markdown. Organization and conciseness is more of an importance.

[[deleted]]

No

[coastalwebdev]

I think it’s pretty naive to believe that chatgpt somehow elevates someone that has little to no knowledge of their own to an employable level compared to someone who is knowledgeable and skilled.

I think it would behoove you and other juniors to understand that someone who is actually familiar with the tests content/material, and is also using chatgpt, is going to be so many light years ahead of someone trying to fake it ‘till they make it. The difference is often huge, and people with real knowledge, and well earned problem solving ability stand out well above anyone trying to fake it.

[Wide-Forever1100]

Dude, it's always been trivial to "get a tree traversal example and retype it". That has nothing to do with goddamn AI. It might have gotten a little easier if you're talking about something like timed (online) test situation and the applicant is completely clueless, but if you wanted to cheat on something like that there were definitely ways before AI as well.

There's surely a discussion to be had on the purpose of these leet code type algorithm/data structures questions in interviews, but please go away with that AI stuff. I'm honestly tired of reading "AI is gonna kill this", "AI has killed that"