31–40 of 108 posts
I'm starting to feel the same about the take home tests. Too time consuming.
they're the worst. about 6 years ago i applied for a job at expensify, and they gave me a take home test. when i sent it back, they couldnt read the code. they asked me to condense it all into one file called main.php. (i separated into controllers / views for a web app)
The high volume apps and crapshoot stuff - 100% yes.
Stuff like template cover letters? Nuh-uh. I have a structure that I stick to - hey, saw you guys are doing X and I think X is cool and wanna help y'all build it up, blablabla - but it's not a fill-in-the-blanks template.
> Additionally have a good set of STAR questions ready and memorized. [...] Tell me a time when you disagreed with a manager… those types of questions that we all hate, but you MUST know them and be familiar with them.
I can spot a memorized behavioral from a mile away, and it is without fail a terrible move. I mean, yeah, go through the questions, jot down a note about that time Alice did that thing or you had to help Bob out with that other thing in case you blank out when you get the question, but don't come up with an answer and memorize it. The point of these questions is to demonstrate that you're cognizant of team dynamics and the need to manage and navigate them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Without a job, one usually has lots of free time.
That still doesn't help much with lining up the offers, but I guess that's less of a concern when you're unemployed (I.E. you'll take the first decent offer you get). However, I feel like I have often read accounts of people with a job interviewing at 6-10 companies and I always wondered how.
Larger companies are aware that you might be pursuing other opportunities, and are usually willing to postpone extending a final offer until the time you are ready to accept it or at least have other offers to compare it to.
I really love being a software engineer. The job application process is the biggest threat to me keeping that passion.
This has got to be one of the most honest descriptions of how job hunting actually works ever written and posted on HN. It's a sharp contrast to a lot of the stuff that is posted here that depicts job hunting like some kind of spiritual search for your life's passion.
Later in your career, if you have kept connections alive, the job hunt should look like this:
"Hi ,
I'm looking for a position doing X at Y, and I noticed you know Sara at Y. Do you mind doing intros? I'd really appreciate it."
...
intros/coffee with Sara.
...
resume to the hiring manager, perhaps through some automated system, but with a thumb on the scales
...
interview
...
hire/no hire decision based on mutual fit.
Now, this isn't about nepotism, it's about the power of having worked together. While the internet is great and you can learn a ton about a candidate (sometimes) by their online work, sometimes you can't. And nothing is as high bandwidth as having worked with someone. (Well, maybe a family connection.)
So if you can build your trust networks and get informal introductions to a company from someone who has worked with both parties, you're in a very strong position.
That said, as I stated at the beginning (and the author did as well), this post was fantastic for folks without such a network.
Why do rejection emails say "good luck" at the end?
this is all good info. especially the take homes. when i interviewed this time around for a new job, the most frustrating part were the take homes. lots of companies expect you to do a sample project that only grants you an audience to a technical phone screen. like, what? didn't i just pass your technical test? if i still have to show my technical prowess doesn't that mean you don't trust my resume, or trust that i…
You lucked out then, I think. If they were looking for a front end developer and asking questions about semaphores, something is definitely wrong.
this is all good info. especially the take homes. when i interviewed this time around for a new job, the most frustrating part were the take homes. lots of companies expect you to do a sample project that only grants you an audience to a technical phone screen. like, what? didn't i just pass your technical test? if i still have to show my technical prowess doesn't that mean you don't trust my resume, or trust that i…
> "i also agree these take homes are not 4 hour affairs. they give you no direction so you can't sacrifice ui/ux for functionality because you have no clue how they judge it." I had a take home for a UI position that I spent ~10-12 hours on. It was some pretty standard UI stuff and they had 5 points of functionality they wanted you to code. Make it responsive, have these sections in a different order on mobile, make…
I'm starting to feel the same about the take home tests. Too time consuming.
I think it can work both ways. Tasks like that can be time-consuming, but would you rather take a day off for an on-site interview, or spend ~1h doing it at home? There's some line that shouldn't be crossed of course - I think companies shouldn't give the test to everyone - just those who are actually considered after some screening. But I've been on both sides: taking and preparing the test, and I think it's a good…
Do you really think that "crazy unicode test case" person really only spent an hour on your test?
A recent anecdote from my own experience. I've interviewed with this company. Everything seemed to go well, I had a talk with hiring manager, then with one of the guys from technical team where we discussed real world problems, etc. Everything goes well. As soon as I start thinking this could be the one, they say something along the lines of "let's see if this other guy from our team has some questions". So they bring the other guy who seems a little annoyed being dragged away from what he was doing (we're in an open office with glass walls, so I could see him at his desk). This guy turns out to be the "bad cop". He immediately goes down to more CS/academic level with his questions and eventually asks some question along the lines of "what does compiler do in a situation X when there is Y". Well, I am forced to answer that I have no idea (it's not exactly the kind of problem you normally encounter in real life), so the "bad cop" just nods his head in a forgiving manner and I know immediately it's a bust and that he's gonna veto me out. Sounds familiar?