Vibe Coders Giving Interviews

That code is what happens when you tell a developer "we need to save space" but forget to mention "code readability" as a requirement. Single-letter variables, no comments, and recursive calls that would make even the Python interpreter question its life choices. The smirking girl in front of the disaster is all of us watching our colleagues defend their "optimized" code during code review while the codebase burns in the background. Remember kids, the next person to read your code might know where you live.

Salvation through functional programming! The creator of this masterpiece has blessed us with the holiest of conditional statements—baptism implemented in Haskell. The function returns Maybe Person because even divine intervention respects type safety. If you're already baptized? Return Nothing . Otherwise, you get Just (markBaptized p) . The conditionalBaptize function even uses monadic composition with maybe to handle the uncertainty of salvation. Next time your code needs saving, remember that even spiritual transformations can be expressed as pure functions with no side effects—except eternal life, of course.

OMG, the PARANOIA is REAL! 💸 That moment when your developer brain goes full conspiracy theorist because you JUST KNOW these companies are jacking up prices and conveniently scapegoating "AI algorithms" for their greed. You're sitting there, clutching your keyboard, SCREAMING internally because you understand enough about technology to be dangerous but not enough to write the exposé that brings down Big Tech's pricing schemes. The worst part? YOU'RE PROBABLY RIGHT but good luck explaining algorithmic price manipulation to the court system that still thinks the cloud is something in the sky! 🔍

Year 2000 leap year logic is the ultimate litmus test for whether someone actually understands the rules or just memorized "divisible by 4." The century rule (divisible by 100 = not a leap year, UNLESS divisible by 400 = actually a leap year) catches everyone off guard. So 2000 gets people arguing in three camps: the "divisible by 4, obviously yes" crowd, the "wait it's a century year so no" smartypants, and the rare enlightened souls who remember the 400-year exception. The bell curve nails it. Low IQ: simple rule, correct answer. Mid IQ: overthinks it with the century exception, gets it wrong. High IQ: knows the full ruleset, correct answer. It's like watching people debug datetime libraries in real-time.

Oh. My. GOD. The absolute TRAGEDY of tech interviews in one perfect image! 😭 You spend WEEKS mastering how to trace an umbrella for the technical test, only to face the NIGHTMARE of carving intricate fractals during the interview. Then you get the job and what do they have you do? Draw a TRIANGLE. A LITERAL TRIANGLE. The tech industry is GASLIGHTING us, sweetie! We're out here solving theoretical binary tree inversions while the actual job is updating button colors and restarting servers. The AUDACITY! 💅

Sure, your 1000 lines of C++ run 100x faster than my 10 lines of Python. But while you were writing those thousand lines, I finished the project, had lunch, refactored twice, and still had time to scroll through Reddit. That torch of performance might look impressive, but the real caveman move is spending three weeks micro-optimizing what could've been done in an afternoon. Speed isn't just about execution time—it's about developer time too.