Re:DeepMind’s AlphaCode Conquers Coding, Performing as Well ...
by nsxwolf on Friday December 16, 2022 @01:49PM
(#34018446)
The illusion of objectivity is strong. We have an official interviewing process. It has a big survey that turns into "metrics". We have a debrief where we talk about the "metrics" as though it was an "evidence based" process. Then you'll hear someone say "Well, he found a solution for the balanced tree problem, but he just didn't seem all that confident doing it, you know?"
Re:DeepMind’s AlphaCode Conquers Coding, Performing as Well ...
by neilv on Friday December 16, 2022 @02:25PM
(#34018914)
> Then you'll hear someone say "Well, he found a solution for the balanced tree problem, but he just didn't seem all that confident doing it, you know?"
This sounds like yet more evidence that it's really just pledging a frat.
From my side of the table I can confirm that of course luck plays a role. Nevermind the variability of the coding problems themselves, but the variability on the interviewers. Even in my company, that has a formal process and pretense of objectivity, interviewers quality and expectations vary greatly.
In short, I'd say what people on the hiring side hate to hear, but interviewing is ultimately a numbers game. I wouldn't take rejections too seriously. The best you can do is to improve your chances with proper prep (leetcode, system design) and interview broadly.