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

Organizational Skills Beat Algorithmic Wizardry (2015)

johndcook.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 101 posts

Re: Organizational Skills Beat Algorithmic Wizardry (2015)

#81

Post by innocentoldguy »

codingdave wrote: post #76
foreigner wrote: post #27

I totally agree, so how can we interview for this?

You need to ask questions that let them show off their full understanding of a system. People without organization skills will focus on one area and not explain the whole. My favorite is to have someone explain to me what happens when a browser makes a HTTP request to a web URL, which has . Network guys will tell you all about the request and response, web developers will focus on the front end, devOps will tell you…

Personally, I would answer that question by telling you how the HTTP protocol works because, in my mind, that's what you're asking for. If you're going to ask that question, I think you need to be more clear about what you're looking for. I don't think there is any value in interviewers being intentionally vague in order to test if a candidate can guess what they're thinking.

Re: Organizational Skills Beat Algorithmic Wizardry (2015)

#82

Post by Tade0 »

Raidion wrote: post #72
collyw wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am working on CRUD just now. Its amazing how complex some people manage to make simple things. Keeps me in a somewhat unsatisfying job though.

I mean, CRUD doesn't have to be simple. It can get complexity from the underlying data, or dealing with 100 million users at once, or it having to return results FAST. Just because you don't have to write some novel algorithm doesn't mean you're not solving hard problems.

I think the parent wanted to say that their problems are rather tedious than hard.

I'm currently in a very similar situation - a project in which we have a table of records, two of which are special in a certain, business-related way, but need to be presented along with the others, so to get around this we place "ifs" here and there - a lot of them.

It's a generally simple project that has been turned into something overly complicated because somebody lacked the foresight to design the architecture better.

Re: Organizational Skills Beat Algorithmic Wizardry (2015)

#83

Post by innocentoldguy »

fwdpropaganda wrote: post #29
acroback wrote: post #23

Why the f k do these stupid companies then ask really hard Algorithm puzzles in interviews? This is insane, what is imp? Giving too much info or not, asking more questions or not? Oh man, sometimes I hate this process of interviewing.

What do you suggest they should ask instead?

When I interview people, I ask them to describe a project they worked on. I ask them questions about the project and see if they're able to talk intelligently about the architecture. I talk to them about what I'm working on, so they'll know if it is something they want to do, and ask them questions about my project to see if they can talk about them intelligently. During this process, I get a feel for their technical abilities, how they like to work, and who they are as a person. I can tell if someone has skills without resorting to silly puzzles, obscure CS questions, or several hours of playing "Guess what I'm thinking."

I also don't find any value in testing "How someone solves a problem," since people solve things differently. I have no guarantee that my way is the best, so why would I reject someone else just because their brain works differently than mine does?

Re: Organizational Skills Beat Algorithmic Wizardry (2015)

#84

Post by Veen »

b1daly wrote: post #10

This is a nicely succinct expression of what I intuit to be almost a universal rule of creating/designing/making. It’s related to what I think of as “coherency” and I’m often surprised at how long it can take. The most recent example is that I was writing up some technical feedback for a reviewer of a product I develop. My first draft was several pages worth of dense prose. I realized I needed to simplify, otherwise…

As someone who earns their living writing articles and web copy for brands, this frustrates me no end. I'm often asked why I charge so much more for web copy than a blog article, when a blog article is often 1000 words plus and web copy might be 200 words or fewer (sometimes just a couple of sentences with a strapline).

The answer is that I can write a competent blog article about as fast as I can type. Decent web copy that boils down the essential benefits and features of a product and expresses them concisely and compellingly takes much much longer to get right.

Re: Organizational Skills Beat Algorithmic Wizardry (2015)

#85

Post by loup-vaillant »

loxs wrote: post #47
fwdpropaganda wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you guessing, or have you actually asked?

I have been a janitor (or pretty much that) during my MD studies, then I have been a nurse, then a doctor, then a programmer. I didn't know a janitor who thought that nurses or doctors didn't do valuable work (greatly more valuable than their own). In the IT field it's different though. Every junior is absolutely sure they are better than their team lead (been there, done that, also been the team lead). Every QA thin…

> I didn't know a janitor who thought that nurses or doctors didn't do valuable work (greatly more valuable than their own).

Much harder, no doubt. More valuable though… a good portion of that value comes from having a clean hospital to begin with.

(Not that I am not talking about market value, which is obviously much lower than that of doctors, thanks to the larger supply of janitors, and how much cheaper it is to train them.)

Re: Organizational Skills Beat Algorithmic Wizardry (2015)

#86

Post by dboreham »

jwdunne wrote: post #24
icebraining wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think wolco is talking about payments that are charged after the service is (at least partially) performed, which is common in the B2B world.

Yes. We've had clients that have literally taken courses on how to dodge invoices for as long as possible. Well past our 30 day terms.

A horse head in their bed works quite well.

Re: Organizational Skills Beat Algorithmic Wizardry (2015)

#87

Post by collyw »

Raidion wrote: post #72
collyw wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am working on CRUD just now. Its amazing how complex some people manage to make simple things. Keeps me in a somewhat unsatisfying job though.

I mean, CRUD doesn't have to be simple. It can get complexity from the underlying data, or dealing with 100 million users at once, or it having to return results FAST. Just because you don't have to write some novel algorithm doesn't mean you're not solving hard problems.

I never understand why it is looked down upon so much here on HN. Sure anyone can write a crappy insecure PHP for checking a few hundred records. But building a secure maintainable performant application takes some knowledge.

Re: Organizational Skills Beat Algorithmic Wizardry (2015)

#88

Post by leesec »

innocentoldguy wrote: post #81
codingdave wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You need to ask questions that let them show off their full understanding of a system. People without organization skills will focus on one area and not explain the whole. My favorite is to have someone explain to me what happens when a browser makes a HTTP request to a web URL, which has . Network guys will tell you all about the request and response, web developers will focus on the front end, devOps will tell you…

Personally, I would answer that question by telling you how the HTTP protocol works because, in my mind, that's what you're asking for. If you're going to ask that question, I think you need to be more clear about what you're looking for. I don't think there is any value in interviewers being intentionally vague in order to test if a candidate can guess what they're thinking.

Or you could just ask them to specify like, "did you mean explain x or y?".

Re: Organizational Skills Beat Algorithmic Wizardry (2015)

#89

Post by collyw »

Tade0 wrote: post #82
Raidion wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, CRUD doesn't have to be simple. It can get complexity from the underlying data, or dealing with 100 million users at once, or it having to return results FAST. Just because you don't have to write some novel algorithm doesn't mean you're not solving hard problems.

I think the parent wanted to say that their problems are rather tedious than hard . I'm currently in a very similar situation - a project in which we have a table of records, two of which are special in a certain, business-related way, but need to be presented along with the others, so to get around this we place "ifs" here and there - a lot of them. It's a generally simple project that has been turned into something…

What I meant is that with a decent database design, you shouldn't need to much code to get things done (using Django as I am used to).

Instead I am jumping from file to file, trying to work out what is going on, what all the seemingly unnecessary code is doing. It can be both tedious and difficult just to get data between the database and a webpage.

I want to rewrite a lot of it, but I understand that working, tested code is actually worth quite a lot, and there may be functionality that i haven't understood yet.

Re: Organizational Skills Beat Algorithmic Wizardry (2015)

#90

Post by AnimalMuppet »

stupidcar wrote: post #67

I was thinking along similar lines the other day. I was thinking about whether I've actually improved as a software developer over my career. It occurred to me that most of the languages and frameworks I use are either less than a few years old, or have been changed or reinvented in substantial ways. As such, not much of the declarative knowledge from my early career is of much use. But have my skills improved? I cam…

This is not true of me. Even on the micro scale, I'm much better than I was at 24. I write far fewer bugs. And I write code that communicates intent much better.
Post reply on HN