It's hard for me to rate the interview difficulty. In some ways it was much easier than others but that was because the elements that make interviewing difficulty for me were removed (no on the spot, no high pressure problem solving with someone watching you try to recall algorithms under duress, no rote memorization, no boring take homes I can't find the motivation to finish because the world doesn't need another CRUDdy social media app, all kind interviewers), but it was more in depth than most interviews I've had and I felt was a really fair reflection of my knowledge and limitations in a way that explored problem solving and programming holistically. Process: 1) 30 minute phone call with recruiter 2) Code Submit take home project with a 4 hour time limit, though a bit longer for brand new baby devs (if you're averse to take homes, don't let that stop you, this one is a delightful optimization problem that's thematic and like playing a city simulator with your code in any language you want, and the time frame was pretty accurate for the task with time for testing and commenting) 3) 30 minute conversation with hiring manager a couple weeks later about what they're working on, what my interests and goals are, how it matches or didn't with what they're doing and positions open. 4) Full-loop which was four 45 minute conversations, mostly with team members and one not. First was a very reasonable system design question to ask someone without scale experience that reflected a problem they had solved. It was really nice that the interviewer typed out the system design, since this allowed me to focus on thinking, helped me see where I was going off in the wrong direction, and helped with communication. I often get nervous that my doodles or whatever the interviewer wants isn't conveying thoughts well, so I was really grateful for this whole process since I've had some interviewers not be accommodating with my preferences to communicate ideas which makes it so unnecessarily stressful. Second was discussing the take home assignment in depth, which I loved that was a part of it. Discussion was around how I approached it, improvements I could have made. Interviewers were great at gently guiding when I was making silly design decisions, which was wonderful. Third was behavioral and interests based. Some of the questions were very unusual, others were more around engineering attitudes such as what makes a good vs great engineer and why isn't everyone a great engineer, some standard STAR questions. Final was talking with someone not on the team I was interviewing for on if I had any questions about the company for him and very informal chat around the company overall, though we ended up talking about hobbies at the end of it. The team was an absolute delight. Very warm and welcoming. The interview process was significantly less stressful than others I've encountered, and I felt really accurately allowed me to share what I knew, but also what I didn't know. It was also a good reflection of understanding some aspects of what it would be like to collaborate on the team and how they provide feedback, which was much more insightful than most other interview processes I've experienced in tech for me as an interviewee aiming to determine if this would be a good fit for me beyond just relying on asking questions.