So people are complaining that whiteboarding is the wrong way to interview. That we don't discover if they can write and maintain complex software system, instead focusing on 'trivia'. I don't disagree (I think that the trivia being tested can be important - a team with no one that has deep knowledge of data structures of algorithms is lost), but I also don't know a good way to interview that finds out what we need to know.

How do you find out if someone can make good long term decisions in a short amount of time? It seems inherently contradictory. Some people say by giving homework problems. They're not wrong, that might give valuable insight, but I know that I would hate that, so others might too.

Can there be a good answer?