I don’t often leave public feedback, but I think it’s important to give other candidates a heads-up before they waste their time on this process. The job posting seemed promising — a senior PHP engineer role that involved working with modern tech stacks like Laravel, Redis, GenAI, OpenSearch, and APIs. The job description was clear: build scalable APIs, integrate third-party services, and contribute to production-level architecture for an exciting fintech company. But the reality? It felt more like I was being quizzed for a PHP exam than evaluated for the skills I’ve honed over years of experience. The Timeline of My Interview: From Excitement to Disgust The First 10 Minutes The interview started with the interviewer talking through some of the requirements — which were exactly what I’d expected: solid experience with API development, Laravel, and other relevant tech. But then… things took a turn. Instead of diving into the specifics of the job, we were immediately thrown into a barrage of theoretical questions about PHP internals and concepts like SOLID, PSRs, and abstract classes. I could tell almost immediately that the interviewer was more interested in testing my ability to memorize PHP documentation than actually discussing my real-world experience building systems. This should’ve been a red flag, but I tried to stay open-minded and thought, "Maybe this is the process they follow." Minutes 10 to 25 The more we went on, the more I realized this was not about assessing practical skills, but about whether I could regurgitate textbook answers. Questions like: "What’s the difference between self and static?" "What are the differences between PHP versions?" "Can you name all the PSRs?" "Do you know magic methods?" There was no focus on how I’d actually implement these concepts in the context of a Laravel application or any real-world projects I’ve worked on. At one point, the interviewer mentioned how essential it was to "know these concepts in depth" and seemed frustrated when I said I didn’t have time to dive deeply into every PHP minor version change. This is when I began to lose interest. I could already tell this wasn’t going to be about how I could solve actual problems or work on production-grade code. The entire focus was on theoretical compliance — memorization of terms and definitions. At this point, I told the interviewer that I was no longer interested. They didn’t take it well, but I wasn’t about to waste my time with a process that didn’t reflect the role I was applying for. Minutes 25 to 40: The Final Straw The final blow came when they asked about something as trivial as regex. Now, this was a question I could actually answer — it was simple and practical. Yet, when I nailed it, the interviewer seemed upset, as though they were expecting more "theoretical" answers. I felt frustrated and started to disengage completely, mentally and physically. It became clear to me that the whole process was a gatekeeping exercise. The focus wasn’t on solving real problems or demonstrating my abilities to build scalable, secure applications. It was a test of how well I could answer trivial PHP questions — questions that wouldn’t help them evaluate my ability to actually perform on the job. Why This Approach Doesn’t Work for Senior Developers The job posting clearly highlighted the need for a senior engineer with practical experience in building and scaling APIs, working with Laravel, and integrating third-party services. But none of those core job responsibilities were covered in the interview. Instead, I spent 45 minutes being quizzed on theory — theory that didn’t even apply to the work I’d be doing. If this is how they screen for candidates, I’m left wondering how they determine if someone actually has the required background in Laravel or API development. Is this how they evaluate whether someone has the experience outlined in the job description? The interview felt less like an evaluation and more like an academic quiz. And here’s the kicker: I was told that if I passed this “theory test,” there would be a second interview with the client where they’d check for actual skills. But let’s think about that for a second: if I had passed this test (which was more about memorizing theory than actual coding) and then went to an interview with the client, I’d be rejected because I wouldn’t have the real-world experience or knowledge they need. The Flawed System The interview process felt like it was built to filter out candidates who might not be able to memorize all the PHP documentation. But it doesn’t take into account the fact that senior engineers are expected to have practical knowledge and experience, not just the ability to pass tests. The lack of focus on practical skills, security practices, and real-world problem solving left me frustrated. At one point, I even pointed out that I was no longer interested, and it was clear on my face that I had completely disengaged. But they still seemed obsessed with these pointless technicalities. Ultimately, I feel like this process rewards book-smart candidates who can regurgitate definitions but completely misses the mark when it comes to assessing actual engineering expertise, problem-solving skills, and real-world experience. It’s like they’ve created an environment where memorizing theory is more important than actually building things that work in production. In Conclusion If you are a seasoned developer who thrives on building systems, solving problems, and working with modern tools like Laravel, APIs, and cloud-based technologies, this interview process is not for you. You will be evaluated on how well you can answer theoretical questions, not on the skills you actually need to do the job. The process felt like an academic quiz that had little to do with real-world engineering, and it’s hard to believe anyone would be able to demonstrate their abilities as a senior engineer in such an environment. If this is the process they follow, I strongly recommend looking elsewhere for a role that actually values your experience and practical expertise.