0:29

In this segment, the speaker explains the company’s approach to take‑home coding assessments: candidates are permitted to use any AI tools they wish. Rather than prohibiting AI, the guidance encourages candidates to pick an interesting piece of the problem, build a simple working demo, and add a meaningful improvement rather than merely reproducing an existing solution. The evaluation focus has shifted from testing raw coding ability to assessing whether candidates can effectively direct AI, verify its output, and ensure the resulting code is correct and appropriate.

More from Angelina

1:02:01
youtube.com

One Person, Many Voices: How to Build Agents That Sound Like a Real Person

today
0:32
youtube.com

Did We Make the Stupidest Mistake

20h ago
0:42
youtube.com

Expensive AI Models Overthink

1d ago
49:40
youtube.com

Why Solo Builders Should Sell to Enterprises, Not Just Consumers | Joseph Enochs, Chief AI Officer

2d ago
0:27
youtube.com

Engineers won’t be replaced — they’ll become directors 🎬

3d ago
0:27
youtube.com

CAPTCHA Was Built to Block Bots. Now We Want Them In 🤖

4d ago
1:00:26
youtube.com

How Fast AI Learned Math | Phillip Kerger, Professor @ UC Berkeley, ex-NASA

5d ago
0:31
youtube.com

1 in 100 Trillion — Beating Face ID With Your Palm

1w ago
0:28
youtube.com

Stop Overbuilding Your Data Stack Before You Start

1w ago
1:02:02
youtube.com

The MrBeast Rule That Quietly Decides Who Wins on YouTube | Rox Codes, CEO @ Flightcast

1w ago
0:21
youtube.com

When Your AI Knows but Can't Tell You

1w ago
See all content