Do people still insist on coding tasks? Why don't simply formulate questions that await a broader and deeper knowledge of things, which helps to know how far the candidate can go?
And for questions, I don't mean "it's better a list or a set?", but something like: "you have an application like this, how can you improve it to perform X?"
People still cheat, or try to. Some of our interviewers have seen candidates start out the interview being completely unable to answer the most basic questions about a programming language, only to flip around a few moments later and give almost encyclopaedic answers, with release dates for specific feature and comment on implementation details. One minute you can't do array slicing and now you're able to talk about the inner workings of the garbage collector?
We're trying to be fair in hiring, every resume is manually read, interviews a conversations, there are no leet code, no tricks, no AI screening, but they are done remote and so far two out of three candidate clearly cheat, during a live interview, to cover up an impressive lack of general knowledge.
Because most people who've been involved in tech interviewing have arrived at the same conclusion - these kinds of questions are too easy for candidates to answer in ways that make them appear great, while they can't actually program.
And for questions, I don't mean "it's better a list or a set?", but something like: "you have an application like this, how can you improve it to perform X?"