Google's “Director of Engineering” Hiring Test (2016) • Hacker News Board

Re: Google's “Director of Engineering” Hiring Test (2016)

#341

Post by psyc » Sat, Apr 28, 2018, 4:30 AM UTC

golergka wrote: post #152

psyc wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt it's sarcasm. I've often lamented that as a 30-year 'veteran' I'm still often treated as though I'm probably incompetent, until proven otherwise beyond a reasonable doubt. Some people do ignore my CV. I know that some people believe this is right and necessary because you can't trust anyone. I believe it's a travesty in this industry, and if I am treated this way, I'm walking straight out the door and into my…

> I've often lamented that as a 30-year 'veteran' I'm still often treated as though I'm probably incompetent, until proven otherwise beyond a reasonable doubt. I have had a pleasure of interviewing a 'veteran' who listed both Emacs and vim on his resume, among dozens of other keywords and many, many years of professional experience. I asked him, how do you exit these text editors? "As any other program", he answered,…

That you believe you can judge any developer by how they use their text editor is one of the most pitiful things I've heard on this topic yet. Every time I begin a new job, I pray I'm spared crossing paths with people who think like this.

Re: Google's “Director of Engineering” Hiring Test (2016)

#342

Post by golergka » Sat, Apr 28, 2018, 8:08 AM UTC

psyc wrote: post #341

golergka wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've often lamented that as a 30-year 'veteran' I'm still often treated as though I'm probably incompetent, until proven otherwise beyond a reasonable doubt. I have had a pleasure of interviewing a 'veteran' who listed both Emacs and vim on his resume, among dozens of other keywords and many, many years of professional experience. I asked him, how do you exit these text editors? "As any other program", he answered,…

That you believe you can judge any developer by how they use their text editor is one of the most pitiful things I've heard on this topic yet. Every time I begin a new job, I pray I'm spared crossing paths with people who think like this.

I certainly can judge them for lying on their CV. As I explained in another thread, from my further conversation with him, this developer obviously had no clue about either of these text editors and clearly included them in his CV just as random keywords.

Re: Google's “Director of Engineering” Hiring Test (2016)

#343

Post by hennsen » Sat, Apr 28, 2018, 1:37 PM UTC

cm2187 wrote: post #179

hennsen wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And somebody putting only lies in a resume will turn super honest on the phone?

No but he wouldn't be able to answer questions that go a bit deeper into what they claim they did or know but didn't/don't.

Yes. And that this kind of discovery - especially detecting if they lied at you in written text, which for me is an exclusion criterion - requires having read the text...

Re: Google's “Director of Engineering” Hiring Test (2016)

#344

Post by rurban » Mon, Apr 30, 2018, 3:51 AM UTC

geofft wrote: post #325

rurban wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He definitely didn't lie as I got my correct answers also rejected by some HR guy with no technical background at all. Almost the same questions btw.

I've conversed with you before on this website - you are also someone who does not understand technical terms used by other people, and should fail at this stage. It sucks, but the purpose of an interview process is not to accept everyone, and the fact that certain people (even certain technically skilled people) are rejected is not an indication by itself that the process is broken.

You are saying that when enough people repeat wrong facts it will become true. It certainly happens, but it's still wrong. Many people believe they can turn lead into gold. Just repeat it all over.