The process started very strong. My conversations were insightful, focusing on cultural fit and long-term projects. The turning point was the technical stage. During our session, it was explicitly stated that using AI was not only okay but encouraged to iterate fast—the "what" and "why" over the "how." I performed the sandbox exercise following this exact philosophy: prioritizing and modern problem-solving patterns. Despite following the recommendations and the earlier reassurances, I was ultimately disqualified for "not knowing enough React." No further technical context or feedback was provided. It is deeply confusing to be told to focus on "problem solving speed" only to be rejected later for a lack of specific framework syntax or memory-muscle. Note that I finished the exercise with almost 10 minutes left. Advice to applicants: Be careful. You might be told they value architecture and adaptability, and that "not knowing the stack is fine," but you will still be filtered out by a rigid "framework-first" mindset that contradicts what their own leadership promotes. If you aren't a plug-and-play "trendy framework" expert, your expertise may be irrelevant here. I wonder how that fits with the part of "we give you total freedom to propose and implement changes." Advice to the company: Align your interviewers. If your engineers are promoting AI and high-level design publicly, your final hiring criteria shouldn't revert to a basic syntax checklist. If you tell a candidate that stack familiarity isn't an issue, rejecting them for that exact reason—especially when they deliver the solution ahead of time—is a waste of time and damages your reputation.