be ready for zingers, like " what benefit do i get if i hire you for thousands of dollars a month, instead of paying a couple hundred for a few AI sessions?"

I’m not preparing much because I have quite a few years of experience under my belt.

Basically I read the JD, find some stories from my work that I can tell, brush up the CV for a bit and then that’s it. I don’t prepare for LC interviews and if I get one I just decline.

Maybe AI-assisted coding? I just interviewed with Amazon and they are quite looking on how you use AI to finish a task with a wide scope. Leetcode is not the main part now though.

My employer's process is basically exactly the same: leetcode, system design, behavioural; we just tell candidates not to use AI. Hiring is one of the scarier decisions a manager can make so I think they will stay pretty conservative. Personally my philosophy is that the interview is an information-gathering session, not a workday simulation. So it makes sense to test your fundamentals even if in practice you may be delegating them most of the time.

As a tech lead, from last year, all my new hire interview is fundamentally changed, no concept, no algo, no design. Just a real world problem, even not clearly defined yet, allow candidate use any AI tool they like, ask me questions or do research for problem clarification, and work it out. I'm watching all this process in 1-1.5 hours to see if he is a problem solver. 99% will be solved by AI with your proactivaly and smart prompt or questions in current work, so the thinking and prompting process is key.

Typical interview types we see:

Make this thing that would be impossible without AI. The test is to see if you actually architect it properly and understand principles of how things connect together.

Make this thing that would be impossible without AI. Now make these modifications without any AI.

Make this thing. You may use low quality AI like Composer 3 or none at all, but if you use none, we'll probably think of you as some kind of boomer.

Here's a bunch of technical problems that we don't know the answer to. If you give answers or insights we haven't considered, then you're bringing value to the team (e.g. git/PR policy, microservices, feature flagging, localization, security)

Leetcode is implicit IQ testing. That is why they will likely keep it despite AI.