Hire people who aren’t proven • Hacker News Board

Re: Hire people who aren’t proven

#71

Post by chrisseaton » Thu, Sep 27, 2018, 3:04 PM UTC

princekolt wrote: post #50

chrisseaton wrote: post #13

I don't see how 'hire people who aren't proven' can be compatible with 'can this candidate do the job'. You want to know if they can do the job, but you aren't interested in any proof for that?

That is only true if you see the list of things a person can learn how to do as a closed set. For instance, I really disliked maths in school. I've avoided every software job posting that involved any maths (3D, statistics, etc). However, if I was given a job offer to work on a math-related product I deeply connected with, and that I felt I wanted to contribute, I'd probably be more interested in learning the math st…

You're suggesting companies build teams of amateurs with the hope that they can all pick up the skills amongst themselves as they go.

If you have to for example build a new operating system kernel, or a new compiler, or implement a machine learning system, hiring a bunch of well-intentioned smart people with the vague idea that they can probably figure it out as they go is a bad idea. You sometimes need someone with a track record of being able to do the work you need done.

Re: Hire people who aren’t proven

#72

Post by twtw » Thu, Sep 27, 2018, 3:06 PM UTC

jimmy1 wrote: post #27

FLUX-YOU wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The passion/craftsman culture changed when we started selling our souls for the next ad-click or personal information collection system. While it might have seemed good back then, we now have a massively cobbled-together web ecosystem. I know it's a cheap shot, but those same passionate people built the crap we have today. I don't think it speaks very highly of that time or the merits of passion. (many individuals ha…

> The passion/craftsman culture changed when we started selling our souls for the next ad-click or personal information collection system. I am really passionate about the information collection system I work on. I do my best to ensure data isn't leaked, everything is secure and encrypted. If you would like to offer a solution to the fact that the vast majority of people in this country now expect software to be free…

> If you would like to offer a solution to the fact that the vast majority of people in this country expect software to be free

This is critical. I think it even goes beyond this: most developers expect software they use to be open source. People have gotten used to the software from Google/Facebook/etc that they can develop and release as open source due to their essentially infinite revenue stream.

Re: Hire people who aren’t proven

#73

Post by sidpuri » Thu, Sep 27, 2018, 3:06 PM UTC

getaclue wrote: post #56

jarsin wrote: post #45

I think tons of experienced people that love programming moved on because of the "Google Interview". You got all this experience and love making stuff for users, but you don't know the "insert trick of the week" to solve the latest "elite" programming question. Bye Bye. No more jobs for you.

Interesting view point. Haven't thought about it like this before. Anecdotally, I am finding more of these people in indie development. Making their own thing or working with like minded people. I used to look to Google/Facebook for experts and people to follow. Now, I look elsewhere.

I think some of the fellows at Google are still some of the best people to look up to but not new grad CS majors they know as much as you do about engineering

Re: Hire people who aren’t proven

#74

Post by menacingly » Thu, Sep 27, 2018, 3:06 PM UTC

maxxxxx wrote: post #6

I think hiring has become more difficult now that programming has been discovered as a well paying mainstream career. When I started in the 90s most people I worked with had a passion for the craft but now I find we interview a lot of people who have a CS degree just for the career prospects but not out of interest for the craft. I find it much easier to deal with someone who has no relevant experience but cares vs s…

This has been on the tip of my tongue but not formalized. I don't think it even matters if you're talented or particularly brilliant. If you've felt the delight of bending the machine to your modest intentions of blinking a light then you tend to be a person I wouldn't be able to stop from tackling tricky problems if I wanted to.

Re: Hire people who aren’t proven

#75

Post by lfowles » Thu, Sep 27, 2018, 3:06 PM UTC

chrisseaton wrote: post #71

princekolt wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is only true if you see the list of things a person can learn how to do as a closed set. For instance, I really disliked maths in school. I've avoided every software job posting that involved any maths (3D, statistics, etc). However, if I was given a job offer to work on a math-related product I deeply connected with, and that I felt I wanted to contribute, I'd probably be more interested in learning the math st…

You're suggesting companies build teams of amateurs with the hope that they can all pick up the skills amongst themselves as they go. If you have to for example build a new operating system kernel, or a new compiler, or implement a machine learning system, hiring a bunch of well-intentioned smart people with the vague idea that they can probably figure it out as they go is a bad idea. You sometimes need someone with…

That someone didn't come fully formed and ready for OS development out of the womb. It's a good argument for looking at track record when hiring for senior positions though.

I've been interested in many fields, but can't afford to take time to establish myself in them unless there is also significant interest from a company looking to hire me.

Re: Hire people who aren’t proven

#76

Post by HillaryBriss » Thu, Sep 27, 2018, 3:07 PM UTC

fma wrote: post #42

ryandvm wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bingo. As an "old timer", it's not that we don't care; we still love the craft as much as ever. It's just that we are at a point in our careers where we can afford to have a much lower tolerance for bullshit. Manager says "let's have a weekend pizza party hackathon!!!" and the old-timers are the first to recognize and decline the opportunity for unpaid overtime fixing bugs.

In my younger days (I'm only 35 lol) I used to want to apply for jobs that said junk like "fast paced environment". Now I'm like screw that... I mean every company wants you to work as hard as possible and turn things around...but now I feel the ones publish it want to put you through the ringer.

> "fast paced environment"

yes. and, if I were to pursue a job with such a description, I'd have only myself to blame when the insane conditions started.

Re: Hire people who aren’t proven

#77

Post by VerbEncroacher » Thu, Sep 27, 2018, 3:08 PM UTC

maxxxxx wrote: post #6

I think hiring has become more difficult now that programming has been discovered as a well paying mainstream career. When I started in the 90s most people I worked with had a passion for the craft but now I find we interview a lot of people who have a CS degree just for the career prospects but not out of interest for the craft. I find it much easier to deal with someone who has no relevant experience but cares vs s…

let the self incrimination begin: halt

Re: Hire people who aren’t proven

#78

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Sep 27, 2018, 3:08 PM UTC

ghaff wrote: post #43

snowwrestler wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By all means, you should use whatever criteria you would like to hire your own staff. But in general, I would encourage folks in computer tech industries to be hesitant to assume such a binary approach to evaluating prospects. "Did you code for fun in high school?" might be a useful question now, because software development as a field is so young that high school students can try out significant work easily. But in…

CS/programming is almost unique in this regard in that there's a significant school of thought out there that, if you haven't been programming as a hobby since you were a kid, that's a disqualification. As you say, there is pretty much zero expectation in any other STEM field that you did much more than take some science classes in high school and liked them. (In STEM. Obviously you presumably don't apply to Juilliar…

[deleted]

Re: Hire people who aren’t proven

#79

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Sep 27, 2018, 3:09 PM UTC

snowwrestler wrote: post #29

maxxxxx wrote: post #6

I think hiring has become more difficult now that programming has been discovered as a well paying mainstream career. When I started in the 90s most people I worked with had a passion for the craft but now I find we interview a lot of people who have a CS degree just for the career prospects but not out of interest for the craft. I find it much easier to deal with someone who has no relevant experience but cares vs s…

By all means, you should use whatever criteria you would like to hire your own staff. But in general, I would encourage folks in computer tech industries to be hesitant to assume such a binary approach to evaluating prospects. "Did you code for fun in high school?" might be a useful question now, because software development as a field is so young that high school students can try out significant work easily. But in…

[deleted]

Re: Hire people who aren’t proven

#80

Post by wgerard » Thu, Sep 27, 2018, 3:09 PM UTC

My co-founder and I believe so strongly in this that we started a company around it.

So many companies are willing to let perfect be the enemy of good. It's why this concept of an MVP has to be hammered in over and over again. And yet, we still let this mentality pervade hiring. We hire people on the slim chance that they'll need to re-implement a consensus algorithm and not on the 99.99% chance that all of their work will be writing CRUD-like code.

We (as in, Headlight) deal with a lot of bootcamp grads and people who are entering tech later in life (which for tech, means 25+). It's shocking the number of them who are insanely adept at software development for the amount of experience they have and are completely overlooked because of any of the following:

* Their pedigree

* Their experience given their age

* Their program's focus on practical software development and not on more academic topics

It's really mind-boggling. It's great for us, because it's a totally unappreciated and under-served market. Still, I can't imagine how frustrating it is for those candidates. We're still new, but so far our clients' satisfaction with our candidates has been nothing short of enthusiastically positive.

All that to say, you should really consider adjusting your hiring expectations drastically. You're building a house. Why are you trying to hire a civil engineer, and not a contractor?