Engineering interviewing is a field where many common beliefs are misleading; for instance, evaluating past work does not predict job performance as effectively as practical programming assignments.

The traditional use of brain teasers in interviews is becoming less relevant; companies should focus on practical problem-solving skills instead.

Interviews are the worst way to evaluate engineers, except for all the other options available, so it's essential to make the interview process as accurate as possible.

No engineer passes all their interviews, highlighting the inconsistency and noise in the interview process.

Larger companies tend to rely more on brain teasers in interviews, which can introduce noise, but they often use them as a standard part of their hiring process. Bigger companies focus more on measuring innate ability rather than specific coding skills for their codebase, while smaller companies prioritize immediate productivity in specific technologies like Ruby on Rails.

During interviews, I focus on how applicants respond to questions rather than the technical details, which allows me to gauge their character.

The core problem in interviews is the tension between measuring quick problem-solving skills and the ability to handle larger projects over time. Many of the best programmers have numerous job options, making it challenging for companies that require a trial employment period to attract them.

The hiring process should focus on a candidate's ability to contribute to the business strategy, not just technical skills.

Interviewing is a skill that requires training; it's important to develop a structured approach to evaluate candidates effectively.