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

We only hire the best means we only hire the trendiest (2016)

danluu.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 653 posts

Re: We only hire the best means we only hire the trendiest (2016)

#311

Post by static_noise »

beat wrote: post #275

So here's the thing... hiring at larger, growing companies often means weeding through a stack of a hundred resumes, for one or two or five roles. Most of those resumes need to go away. The interview process, for competent candidates, is going to cost you at bare minimum a half hour of one person's time for initial screening. A quality interview is going to take a couple of hours each for a few important people - man…

People learn about and optimize for those heuristics. Those resumes will on average get better and better over time until half of them are almost perfect. Those people all spent considerable time and energy on optimizing their resume. You get people who look good on paper. They will continue to excel in your company (on paper). If your job is to look good on paper. Yes, go on.

Re: We only hire the best means we only hire the trendiest (2016)

#312

Post by hinkley »

protomyth wrote: post #54
dx034 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can be important for anyone with client contact. Even if you don't care what people wear, external clients will react differently depending on what you wear. It could be that you specifically don't want to wear suit to give the impression that you're a dynamic start-up but in the end clothing always matters.

Depending on your position it might also be different for different clients. My friend kept a suit at work in case they had to meet with the feds or a bank. If I ever wore a suit to work, my coworkers would be wondering what was wrong or who was visiting.

I worked with a guy who had been at this place forever. He would show up in a suit and take long lunches whenever he wanted a raise. And it worked.

Re: We only hire the best means we only hire the trendiest (2016)

#313

Post by jakebasile »

twoquestions wrote: post #124

Damn, this paints a picture where only the shiniest candidates matter, and the rest of us mere mortals should apologize for breathing their air. How do you know if you're "the best", and if not, how do you become "the best" (or at least employable), or is this industry a "ya got it or ya don't" kind of place like music or art, where only the top 10% deserve to make a living?

This doesn't just paint the picture, it holds a mirror up to the reality of our industry. If you aren't in SV (or NYC maybe), don't have a degree from an expensive college (or worse, no degree at all!), or haven't worked for FB/Google/Apple, you're basically dog shit to any interviewer.

All the clamoring for developers is because so many companies delude themselves into thinking they should only hire the shiniest candidates, as you put it, even though there are thousands of other people who could do the job almost or just as well if they would look at people living in another city, without degrees, and who haven't worked at a huge company and/or unicorn startup. As a bonus, people like that (like me!) are generally cheaper since they don't have to pay the ridiculous cost of living in the Valley, or realize that making enough salary for a comfortable living without going into multiple hundreds of thousands is perfectly fine.

Re: We only hire the best means we only hire the trendiest (2016)

#314

Post by paulddraper »

afpx wrote: post #301
beat wrote: post #275

So here's the thing... hiring at larger, growing companies often means weeding through a stack of a hundred resumes, for one or two or five roles. Most of those resumes need to go away. The interview process, for competent candidates, is going to cost you at bare minimum a half hour of one person's time for initial screening. A quality interview is going to take a couple of hours each for a few important people - man…

First, there may not be a tech shortage if teams are “weeding through a stack of a hundred resumes, for one or two or five roles....” But, if there is, I’m assuming that candidates are just applying randomly to any positions that are available. The ‘Tinder’ strategy is probably a good one if the goal is to maximize earnings. However, if one is a ‘5’ it makes sense to spam all of the positions. But, if one is a ‘10’,…

> I’m assuming that candidates are just applying randomly to any positions that are available

Yep, that's it. The same cost-benefits dynamics as spam mail.

Re: We only hire the best means we only hire the trendiest (2016)

#315

Post by Analog24 »

alexasmyths wrote: post #265
Analog24 wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Renaissance Technology has been around decades and is one of the biggest hedge funds in the world. I don't think it qualifies as an early-stage company.

Wow. So many downvotes. Re: renaissance. Of course. I'm highlighting where the 'we don't hire finance' trope originates. Nothing to do with Renaissance. For all of you too young to remember: In the 'dot-com' era - many 'new companies' still hired 'top down'. They would hire an 'executive team' first, and then maybe developers. Often, a CFO etc.. Think PetStore.com - two MBA's hiring 'others to do the work, as workers…

I'm not disagreeing with your point but I think it's a bit out of context here. The parent comment was specifically talking about what they heard from Renaissance Technologies, not a some hipster startup.

Re: We only hire the best means we only hire the trendiest (2016)

#316

Post by justin66 »

falcolas wrote: post #183
matwood wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn’t graduate from a top college and google has pinged me numerous times to interview. I always turn them down because I like my company and do not want to move. I may also fail the google interview, but they certainly talk to me.

I didn't graduate from college, period, yet recruiters talk to me. It's funny how quickly they backpedal their interview offers when I mention that, however.

Yeah, it costs them nothing to send an automated form letter out or make a cold call without researching your background for five seconds.

Re: We only hire the best means we only hire the trendiest (2016)

#317

Post by paulddraper »

baddox wrote: post #287
mrkurt wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Usually just append "... for the position" when you see "we only hire the best".

Or really, “we only hire the best given all our criteria and constraints.” Then it’s solidly in the realm of tautology.

We hire the best we hire.

Re: We only hire the best means we only hire the trendiest (2016)

#318

Post by brightball »

brightball wrote: post #38
tobyhinloopen wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is also finding a balance of course. All these technologies you mention are good for most webdevelopment projects. No point in writing everything in a different language

True but it does show exploration and curiosity to at least try another language or two. If you’ve been doing .NET or PHP for 5+ years without even trying something else I’d treat it as a red flag too. Level of interest is the #1 quality in the great programmers I’ve been around. If you aren’t exploring even a little that’s a concern.

I'm replying to myself here because it's interesting how different of a reaction this comment is getting than it did 2 years ago when the same thing phrased slightly differently was the most popular comment on the Interviewing Software Engineers article.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9739163

Re: We only hire the best means we only hire the trendiest (2016)

#319

Post by nanodano »

donretag wrote: post #278

"who was tragically underemployed for years because of his low GPA in college" Who puts their GPA on their resume, or even discusses it, 2-3 years out of school? I have never discussed GPA or anything about their academic experience to mid/senior level candidates, nor has anyone ever asked me.

Totally agree with this. If they were tragically underemployed for years, I'd bet almost anything it was not because of their college GPA.

Nobody looks at GPA, or cares, or even expects it to be there, unless you have never had a job and have nothing else to put on your resume.

As someone who has interviewed many developers, GPA has never, ever even come up as a topic.

Re: We only hire the best means we only hire the trendiest (2016)

#320

Post by jamesmp98 »

rb808 wrote: post #279

The comments about Microsoft tech stack are interesting. The best, most successful, most reliable most loved by users application I worked on was distributed C# SOA system windows with a relational database. However coming off that job I had trouble finding work. Now I work on a Scala/Java/Python with containers - we have so many problems - its difficult to use and maintain but suddenly I'm drowning in job offers.

Sorry, but it's not JavaScript
Post reply on HN