Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tech Interview Torture Chamber

mattfriz.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 232 posts

Re: Tech Interview Torture Chamber

#141

Post by [deleted] »

JustSomeNobody wrote: post #97
CriticalSection wrote: post #11

Surprised I don't see my main pet peeve - early reference check. Before I even talk to anyone I'm asked to provide three phone numbers of three former managers. So I have to call them up, make sure the number is still working, and ask for the favor that they can give me a reference in case anyone reads my application. All of these other things are on me. References I have to call two or three (or at one company, six)…

For me, these are weed outs. I use behavior like this to weed out the companies I am willing to work for.

[deleted]

Re: Tech Interview Torture Chamber

#142

Post by abawany »

johnnyb9 wrote: post #87

I once had to do a take home project... the spec said I could write either a console application or a GUI. Fast forward to the in person meeting, they go through my solution and nitpick random things like "why use NuGet packages" or "why no test cases" (I had written them but they got mysteriously removed from the solution). Finally the CTO speaks up and asked why I didn't write a GUI, as many other candidates had (m…

My response to the 'why not GUI' question would have been different: 'console applications are more versatile, easier to run across multiple platforms, and can be invoked by build and automation tools. I also feel that they might be friendlier from an accessibility point of view than GUIs.'

I am not BS-ing - I really like console apps. I agree with you that you dodged a bullet there. Any place that lays a false choice trap for you in this manner is not one that deserves the best candidates.

Re: Tech Interview Torture Chamber

#143

Post by cheath »

chatmasta wrote: post #14

Wow, this blog has some painfully funny "The Onion"-style articles on it (click the links at the bottom) I particularly liked "Startup Engineer Unwittingly Implements Crappier Version of Open Source Project" [0] [0] http://www.mattfriz.com/#/outbursts/open-source-rehash

I'm so glad you agree. I've been dying laughing over these posts. They're gold.

Re: Tech Interview Torture Chamber

#144

Post by TheOtherHobbes »

WalterBright wrote: post #120
aphextron wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a symptom of a process that is completely broken. I have given up entirely on interviewing for SV companies, and work 100% remote now.

If there was a better process, companies would adopt it, as it would give them a major competitive advantage. They're not complete fools.

Also applies to frameworks and languages?

Re: Tech Interview Torture Chamber

#145

Post by mtberatwork »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #93
bit_logic wrote: post #44

As a senior engineer who already has a good job, here's how I've adapted to the stupid tech interview and plan on doing for future jobs: - Stay at my job longer and push for more raises/promotions. So far this has worked well. I may not get more in raw $ amount vs job hopping, but when risk adjusted (the risks of any new job such as bad manager, etc.) it's worked out ok so far. I think some job hopping is still good…

If you have a job with decent pay, sane management, and reasonably good co-workers, do not casually walk away from it. I've been too many places that didn't have one or more of those. All three in one place... well, think twice before leaving that.

Agreed, and I think this is a lesson learned far too late in life. I had a job early in my career that gave me immense satisfaction which I gave up to live a life in a bigger city and a bigger salary. If I could talk to my younger self, I would tell myself to stay put for as long as possible. Sanity at your job is worth its weight in gold. Fortunately after many years and a few more job changes, I've found a spot that gives me the same satisfaction again. Sure, I may not make the huge salaries as some of my friends do, but the pay I have is decent by any measure and comes with great benefits and a high quality of life. I plan on riding this one out until I retire and that feels pretty good.

Re: Tech Interview Torture Chamber

#146

Post by eldavido »

mfrisbie wrote: post #37

Author here. I'm both pleased and dismayed to see this is as relevant as it was when I wrote it a year ago. Obviously, this piece is satire. When giving interviews, I do whatever I can to make the candidate walk out of there with a smile whether they did well or not. I stand by the idea that it should be possible to entirely assess someone's ability without ripping their guts out or making them sweat.

I am rolling on the floor laughing at this. Thank you for writing it.

"Choose the interviewer" is pretty much "choose a random developer working at a San Francisco tech company". There are so many true stereotypes in here I'm hurting from laughter.

Re: Tech Interview Torture Chamber

#147

Post by dvcrn »

One thing I always thought would be interesting (but no idea if viable): allow trusted engineers / seniors who have been in the company for a certain time to vouch and directly push a referral through to the final interview stage. Something like a joker. You could also link the referrals performance to the engineer directly and limit the joker to one per year or something like that.

When I refer someone I usually do so because I worked with that person in the past and / or highly believe in their technical ability. I want to work with that person because I believe him/her to be a valuable asset for the company.

It's very frustrating to loose a smart person and possibly friend because of some trick interview question

Re: Tech Interview Torture Chamber

#148

Post by cwkoss »

johnnyb9 wrote: post #87

I once had to do a take home project... the spec said I could write either a console application or a GUI. Fast forward to the in person meeting, they go through my solution and nitpick random things like "why use NuGet packages" or "why no test cases" (I had written them but they got mysteriously removed from the solution). Finally the CTO speaks up and asked why I didn't write a GUI, as many other candidates had (m…

"Does your company choose to do things the hard way over the easy way just because it's hard?"

Re: Tech Interview Torture Chamber

#149

Post by Frondo »

ar15saveslives wrote: post #138
paulannesley wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> you just start working with a guy, giving him basic isolated tasks, and as he successfully progresses with his work, task are getting more and more complicated (salary, permissions as well). After few months of such freelance-ish work you can know for sure that this dude is compatible with the team, able to solve problems, able to learn. And only then he becomes an employee with offer, benefits and SO. Careful not…

Are you triggered?

It's an interesting thought experiment, if the original poster had qualified every statement in a different way...

"you just start working with a white person, giving the white person basic isolated tasks, and as the white person successfully progresses with their work, task are getting more and more complicated (salary, permissions as well). After few months of such freelance-ish work you can know for sure that this white person is compatible with the team, able to solve problems, able to learn. And only then the white person becomes an employee with offer, benefits and SO."

Now, I'd like to declare right up front I don't think the original poster was trying to exclude women. I think the original poster just wasn't thinking about their writing at all.

I think that's all the parent post was getting at--people should think more when they write, and make sure they think about what they're saying.

Re: Tech Interview Torture Chamber

#150

Post by Terr_ »

johnnyb9 wrote: post #87

I once had to do a take home project... the spec said I could write either a console application or a GUI. Fast forward to the in person meeting, they go through my solution and nitpick random things like "why use NuGet packages" or "why no test cases" (I had written them but they got mysteriously removed from the solution). Finally the CTO speaks up and asked why I didn't write a GUI, as many other candidates had (m…

"Do you want your employees to divert their time to building functionality that you explicitly identified as unimportant in the requirements-gathering phase??"
Post reply on HN