Ask HN: Is it now common to ask for “full” applications as part of interviewing?

Companies are NOT trying to get free work out of you. If they wanted to hook to a third-party API, it would be easier to use the API sample code. They are trying to save themselves hundreds of dollars in staff salaries and lost productivity, to interview a person who can't function in a realistic programming environment.

These are EXACTLY the sort of companies you should apply to if you really want a job.

Usually these positions, and this field in general, pay well so I would think that people would want to go the extra mile to get the job. Also, you need to remember that employers take a risk with every hire. The cost of hiring and onboarding (and firing, too) are not insignificant.

If I was involved in the hiring process and someone expected to get paid as a contractor for their time spent as part of the interview process, I would not be calling that person back. If, however, a person expressed their displeasure at the amount of time it would take to complete the request given their current workload and schedule, I would probably be willing to work with them and try to figure out some middle ground that would serve both sides reasonably well. Of course, you also always have the ability to tell them that you think it's too much to request as part of the interview process and do not wish to continue the interview process as it would be a waste of everyone's time.

Given the hiring risk(s) and costs associated with it, I think it's extremely distasteful to seek to be paid as part of that process.

What I mean is some recruiter will say "we would like you to complete a coding challenge it shouldn't take any more than 2 hours to complete.' Then the feed back will come back that "the team was disappointed that you didn't implement features x, y and z."

The whole homework/project/coding challenge requirement has really become disrespectful in my opinion. Extremely vague requirements, arbitrary or unrealistic time constraints and then you are judged but not allowed to participate in any discussion about the code you produced.

And perhaps the height of absurdity is recruiters asking via email if you will complete a coding assignment. This is even before speaking to a human being to see if there might even be a fit.

The hiring process just seems to be becoming more broken all the time. Just refuse and say "No."

I think companies might really benefit from smoke testing their own hiring process in some blind fashion.

Doesn't that kind of go towards the "who wants it more" mentality? What's wrong with that? Maybe you and someone else are equally good coders, or maybe one of you is clearly better. Either way, the only thing the company should care about with a salaried position is the finished product, not whether or not someone put more hours into it. I think people all too frequently discount effort and desire when interviewing. People focus on who has some very specific skill set and experience rather than "does this person really want to work here in this position"? Or "is this the type of person we want to work with"?

You can work hard. You can work smart. You can be successful doing either, generally speaking. Do both, and you will usually be more successful than most others.

Plus, if it was a position that you really wanted, I would think/hope that it would be something that you would find yourself spending more time than expected, on. I know I would if I was in that position. If I didn't really care about the position or the company, I would not try overly hard, and I assume that would show. Which is yet another reason I think companies probably should do more of this if anything, not less.