bharathw30

I know the purpose of a technical interview is to test your skillset, but interviews seem to be getting very mechanical - standard questions, lack of interaction, and some people are just jerks! I think some non-technical aspects should still be given importance in technical interviews.

I know the purpose of a technical interview is to test your skillset, but interviews seem to be getting very mechanical - standard questions, lack of interaction, and some people are just jerks! I think some non-technical aspects should still be given importance in technical interviews.

Check it out if you like to read about tech history

Some lessons from Nvidia's history about how to establish a new hardware architecture

It's not about one person or AI doing every single step and giving out the final chip (I apologize if the title was misleading.) The argument is that jobs would require you to cover more parts of the chip design stack. And AI (or just better tooling of any form) can certainly make that happen.

Thanks for sharing, seems promising :)

I agree that the post is open-ended (by design, actually). I'm just saying there is a potential in chip design to combine some parts of the stack. (whatever that means to you.) "RTL-to-GDS" is considered the typical chip design flow.

Do you think "full stack = bad" won't be true if the tooling was better?

That's interesting, thanks for sharing.

That's the dream. But Remote work + Teams spread across the world make it just a dream.

Fair enough, AI doesn't have to be the only solution. But I think some of the verification (at all layers in the stacks) opportunities that AI could be key to make this a reality. (Practically, you need to free up time in order to expand responsibilities without making errors.)

I agree, there are a lot of "big picture inefficiencies" that go unnoticed, which can be avoided by having visibility through the stack. Today, siloed teams are primarily focused on day-to-day execution and miss out on these.