1. Coding task for 90 minutes 2. Coding interview + a bit of system design 3. Take-home assignment for 4 hours to implement features for Dash+Plotly server 4. Technical interview, python + others 5. On-site interview and presentation, 2.5-3 hours 6. Three references Up to 4th interview everything was good, no question. A red flag was when after 4 stages they requested me to make a presentation and to provide 3 references, although we hadn't discussed compensation at all by that point. They assume that a candidate blindly spends many hours of effort to potentially get undefined compensation. Moreover, they initally didn't disclose it on request. As a final step they called my references, got "exceptional feedback", but rejected anyway. That's not a red flag, that's disrespect. What was the point of calling the references? Awful practice. I do not recommend if you respect your time, your effort, and your references.

They sent me a coding challenge. It consisted of two problems with hidden test cases and unlimited attempts. They also had a leaderboard to show you who else had made attempts. I witnessed multiple people spanning dozens of people who submitted 1+ days worth of attempts not to get any further than myself. I managed to get most of the points, but there was no console output and no real way to debug the remaining missed test cases. It took me 6+ hours of tearing my hair out before eventually giving up. The meme if not looking at it having console output isn't realistic and serves to justify the egos if employers. Every year these startups jerk themselves off on hiring only "the best", blissfully unaware that tests like these are punitive, are not a good guage on real world ability, and will turn off developers who are senior enough not to have to go through silly loops like here.