Just finished reading Li Bojie's long post criticizing DeepSeek, and before I could even sigh about how competitive today's interview environment is, Du Jun's missing person notice flooded my feed.

Let me briefly break down this magic-realist story:
1. Li Bojie went for an interview at DeepSeek. He passed the written test, but during the interview, he was accused of plagiarism for constantly looking at the left screen.
2. Feeling his pride shattered, Li Bojie posted online urging everyone to avoid DeepSeek.
3. After seeing this, Du Jun said:
Oh?
So you didn't go missing?
Then how about explaining why you took our money, failed to reply to messages, didn't provide financial reports, and simply vanished?
This is really awkward.
In Li Bojie's narrative, he is a misunderstood genius humiliated by an engineering interviewer who doesn't understand research.
But in the investor's narrative, he is a fraud who took money without doing any work and treated basic contracts like waste paper.
Many so-called genius prodigies share a common flaw:
They think the world should revolve around their algorithms.
If you go to a place like DeepSeek, do you think anyone will give you an easy pass just because you used to work at Huawei?
If you're asked to write code, you write it; if you're doubted, you prove yourself—this is the basic logic of the workplace.
If a person can't even uphold the baseline of delivering on commitments and communicating honestly when paid, then the pride and anger they display in an interview look more like a defensive mechanism born from guilt.
In the past, everyone thought it was okay for geniuses to have eccentric personalities; now people realize that many personality issues are actually a cover for character flaws.
This ongoing drama tells us:
It's hard to lie in front of code, and it feels good to play dead in front of capital, but the internet has a long memory.
If you dare to break an investment agreement, who would trust that you didn't look at a secondary screen during the interview?