Notes from an Interviewer
Hiring practices in software engineering attract sharp criticism here, from trivia-style questions about SOLID and Big-O to overreliance on LeetCode drills, academic records, and culture-specific jargon. Commenters argue that these approaches often select for memorization, conformity, and privilege rather than genuine problem-solving ability, communication, and real-world experience, and they point to alternatives such as work-sample tests and deep dives into past projects. Practical advice for candidates also surfaces: research the company, listen carefully, communicate concisely, and ensure your remote setup (especially audio) doesn’t undermine your performance.
Candidate Preparation and Motivation
- Many support basic prep: research the company, understand products, have a concrete reason you’re interested, and ask informed questions.
- Others push back: most companies aren’t “special,” so demanding deep enthusiasm is presumptuous; minimal but genuine interest plus fair pay is seen as enough for staff roles.
- Leadership roles are expected to show more specific interest and context-setting.
Communication and Interview Behavior
- Strong emphasis on concise, focused answers; “word vomit” and rambling are common failure modes.
- Structured methods (e.g., STAR-like) are recommended for weaker communicators.
- Listening to the question, not talking over interviewers, and responding directly are repeatedly highlighted.
- Ignoring hints during coding tasks is seen as a major red flag; collaborating out of a stuck state matters more than initial perfection.
Remote Setup and Logistics
- Several comments stress having a reliable mic, internet, and basic video-call competence, especially for remote roles.
- Debate over how much to invest in audio gear; consensus that “anything is better than bad Bluetooth/laptop mics,” with an exception noted for recent MacBook mics.
- Some ask about software to improve voice quality; no clear consensus solution emerges.
Interview Content: What to Ask and Why
- Mixed views on theoretical questions (SOLID, HTTP verbs, inner joins, etc.):
- Some avoid them, preferring simple–medium coding tasks plus explanation.
- Others see critique-focused questions (e.g., “which SOLID principle do you disagree with and why?”) as useful for probing depth and judgment—if not treated as rote trivia.
- SOLID and “Uncle Bob” spark extensive debate:
- Some see SOLID as timeless, broadly applicable design guidance.
- Others view it as dated, over-abstract, or cargo-culted enterprise OOP dogma.
- Several note that many developers apply similar ideas instinctively without knowing the acronym.
Signals: LeetCode, Grades, and Heuristics
- One camp argues “be a LeetCode master + personable” is the dominant strategy for many companies.
- Another prefers work-sample–style tasks, deep dives into past systems, and discussion of real projects over puzzles and trivia.
- Academic record is controversial:
- Some see it as a decent heuristic for work ethic and care.
- Others counter it disadvantages neurodiverse people, older candidates, and overlooks motivation differences between school and work.
- There’s criticism that many interview processes optimize for interviewer comfort, trivia, and cultural fit rather than empirically predicting job performance.
Meta-Observations and Cynicism
- Several commenters call interviews a “terrible” but entrenched screening method, often misaligned with actual job skills.
- Concerns about over-rigorous, gatekeeper-style interviewing and reliance on buzzwords and acronyms as social signals rather than true competence.
- Some suggest sending questions in advance to elicit deeper answers; others say that would distort the desired signals.