Blog
The LeetCode interview is dead. Nobody wants to admit it.
Banning AI in interviews is dishonest. Allowing it makes the old tests trivial. Either way, the signal from algorithmic coding interviews collapsed — and we need to name that out loud.
Every engineering leader we talk to is doing one of two things in 2026:
- Pretending the LeetCode interview still works because changing it is too expensive.
- Quietly changing it, but without anything real to replace it with.
Neither is a good answer. Let’s talk about why.
The old deal was always fragile
For twenty years, the industry accepted a tradeoff: algorithmic interviews don’t measure what engineers do day-to-day, but they do measure something — pattern recognition, composure, the willingness to grind. That signal was weak but legible, and legibility is what hiring committees buy.
Post-hire regret hovered around 30% the whole time. Everyone filed that under “hiring is hard” and moved on.
Then AI arrived
The moment Copilot shipped, the old test started leaking. The moment Claude could one-shot a LeetCode hard, it was dead. You now have two options, both bad:
- Ban AI tools in interviews. Candidates have to prove they can solve problems without the tools they’ll use in 100% of real work. You’re measuring memory and patience. The signal is now actively misleading because it selects against the skills you want.
- Allow AI tools. Every hard problem becomes a 4-minute exercise in copy-paste. You can’t distinguish between the engineer who prompted brilliantly and the one who got lucky.
There is no third option where the old test keeps working.
What the replacement has to look like
The test has to measure the actual job. For most engineering roles, that job now looks like:
- Navigate ambiguity inside a real codebase
- Use AI tools well — prompting, evaluating, correcting
- Debug production-like systems under realistic constraints
- Communicate tradeoffs to humans and to machines
You cannot measure any of those in a coding pad. You need a real workspace, a real scenario, and a way to capture evidence of how a candidate thinks — not just what they wrote.
That’s what we’re building at Thinqr. If this resonates, come see it. We’ll walk you through one scenario end-to-end, against one of your own job descriptions.
The first step, though, is saying it out loud: the old interview is dead. Everything else follows.