Founders can't spot real devs from 'vibe coders' prompting AI because take-homes get solved in minutes
Give a dev candidate a build assignment and "they will use AI (like they will if hired)", so traditional tests fail to show if they understand engineering or just vibe code without principles. As the founder said: "I am unsure how to interview new developers" in this new world where everyone looks productive with Claude. It means hiring risks wasting bootstrap cash on junk code that breaks your SaaS before launch.
Key Pain Points
- Candidates blast through take-home projects in minutes with AI, hiding if they can actually architect or debug
- No way to separate great devs who use AI to 10x from lazy ones copy-pasting hallucinations without guidance
- Hiring the wrong dev drains your tiny budget and delays PMF validation while you fix their mess
Original Member Input
"In a world where most developers are using AI Assisstants like Claude Code to develop I am unsure how to interview new developers. What skills are needed in this "new world"? If I give them an assignment to build something they will use AI (like they will if hired)? So what is the ideal skillset for a software developer who can use AI to make the more productive? How do i spot the difference between a great developer who uses AI to speend them up vs a vibe coder who builds software without any engineeing principles and guidance from the dev?"