To hire neurodiverse workers, one firm got rid of job interviews • Hacker News Board

Re: To hire neurodiverse workers, one firm got rid of job interviews

#401

Post by Nasrudith » Tue, Oct 22, 2019, 7:35 AM UTC

commandlinefan wrote: post #346

kempbellt wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Companies should be comprised of whatever works best to build the product effectively that people want to buy. Your argument could be used to ban beanbag chairs, nerf-guns, and kegs from the office because it doesn't meet your "maturity" standards. I've worked at places that have all of these and we made a productive and effective team. If you don't like the company culture, complaining that they aren't "mature enoug…

I think that what underlies this fear of apocryphal “brogrammers” is the fear that, if everybody is left alone to do as they please without being brought to heel, every company will grow into a place where they, personally, don’t feel they fit in. It says a lot more about the authoritarian mindset of people who use the term brogrammer than it says about programmers and nerd culture.

Brogrammer is so amorphous it is basically a term for "I don't like them or their company so lets assign arbitrary sins to their strawmen as the other."

I have seen it used countless times as a term of economic envy in a "they shouldn't be allowed to do better than me" way.

Re: To hire neurodiverse workers, one firm got rid of job interviews

#402

Post by anoncake » Tue, Oct 22, 2019, 8:20 AM UTC

lonelappde wrote: post #390

y_tho wrote: post #387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There's a difference between having Asperger's and being an asshole. Someone may be rude because they're aspie or because they're assholes, but the end result is the same: dealing with rudeness. I rather not.

That's distressingly close to rejecting people because they sound rude for speaking AAVE instead of Received Pronunciation.

Or assuming that people from $COUNTRY are bad people when they merely communicate differently.

Re: To hire neurodiverse workers, one firm got rid of job interviews

#403

Post by b3kart » Tue, Oct 22, 2019, 9:17 AM UTC

seibelj wrote: post #3

> Instead of using CVs and interviews, potential employees undergo a basic competency assessment in which they are evaluated against 25 desirable attributes for software testers, such as the ability to learn new systems or take on feedback. Following these initial tests, potential staff undergo a week of working from home fully paid. They still have an interview. It just isn’t like a traditional interview. You need t…

Sounds awful. Wouldn't any person be next to useless in their first weeks at any new job? Unless you give them some small well-defined task that doesn't require much domain knowledge, I can't see how one could showcase their abilities in this way.

Re: To hire neurodiverse workers, one firm got rid of job interviews

#404

Post by pluma » Tue, Oct 22, 2019, 10:11 AM UTC

kempbellt wrote: post #363

pluma wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a man. I explicitly said this is not about men vs women but about performative masculinity. That said, did it even occur to you that suggesting a dispute between two grown adult men should best be solved with wrestling or a competitive round of video games is in itself infantilising? This doesn't resolve the dispute, it just uses a feat of strength to establish literally unquestioned dominance (even if that domin…

>Resolving a dispute involves, y'know, actually talking and understanding each other's point of view. But that requires empathy. History would disagree, and then hit you with a stick until you agree with its disagreement. Resolving a reasonable dispute (aka, a debate) can be done via talking it out, but this requires both parties to agree upon the rules for "winning" this dispute. Typically, in regards to physical co…

Holy shit, I can't believe I even bothered trying to reason with someone on the Internet who seriously thinks an impromptu wrestling match is a good way to resolve a disagreement at work.

You're either a troll or larping. "Wrestling things out builds comradery"? We're talking about a disagreement about a work issue in a software company.

Ladies and gentlemen, exhibit A: kempbellt.

EDIT: I'm eagerly awaiting being challenged to a duel now.

Re: To hire neurodiverse workers, one firm got rid of job interviews

#405

Post by klarstrup » Tue, Oct 22, 2019, 10:14 AM UTC

kempbellt wrote: post #363

pluma wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a man. I explicitly said this is not about men vs women but about performative masculinity. That said, did it even occur to you that suggesting a dispute between two grown adult men should best be solved with wrestling or a competitive round of video games is in itself infantilising? This doesn't resolve the dispute, it just uses a feat of strength to establish literally unquestioned dominance (even if that domin…

>Resolving a dispute involves, y'know, actually talking and understanding each other's point of view. But that requires empathy. History would disagree, and then hit you with a stick until you agree with its disagreement. Resolving a reasonable dispute (aka, a debate) can be done via talking it out, but this requires both parties to agree upon the rules for "winning" this dispute. Typically, in regards to physical co…

bros'll be bros

Re: To hire neurodiverse workers, one firm got rid of job interviews

#406

Post by gridlockd » Tue, Oct 22, 2019, 10:19 AM UTC

sidlls wrote: post #389

gridlockd wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree, but let's accept it as true for the sake of argument. This is civilization. The question is, is it still right and good? Being born into civilization automatically makes you indebted towards it, because of all its affordances? I think that's morally wrong, and I don't like this attitude as a matter of principle.

Each of us is born into some structure that human animals impose. Some groups afford more or less ability to individuals to contribute (e.g. by voting, putting themselves forward as potential leaders, etc.) to a discussion about whether the existing structures are appropriate. Couching it in moral terms isn't interesting, from a practical perspective.

I don't really get your argument here. Are you sure it's not an thinly-veiled is-ought argument?

Moral terms shape politics, politics shape laws, laws shape civilizations. How can you say they're not interesting?

Of course there have been lots of societies that put people in their place with no social mobility, which has the benefit of not burdening them with the choice of what to do with their lives. This is very practical, but it's immoral - from my point of view.

Luckily, we don't live in one of these societies, but maintaining that "privileged" status doesn't come for free. That's why I don't like your attitude, I am worried you will make extremely poor political decisions because of it.

Re: To hire neurodiverse workers, one firm got rid of job interviews

#407

Post by Grustaf » Tue, Oct 22, 2019, 10:26 AM UTC

romwell wrote: post #392

Grustaf wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the links, I’ll have a look. If you remove the “murder” part from terrorist you basically just have a disgruntled crackpot, but one with political motivations. I know that I’d rather be a theoretical, non violent terrorist than just mentally ill.

An unsuccessful (victimless) terrorist is still a terrorist (e.g. someone who blows up a building, but nobody dies, or the bomb doesn't go off), not merely a disgruntled crackpot. On the other hand, Osama bin Laden is a terrorist, but very far from being mentally ill. His Letter to America[1] clearly outlines the intent and consequence of his actions. Terrorists are, by definition, a threat -- but mentally ill people…

I do know the difference, I'm just not convinced that it is much worse to be politically motivated in your killing rather than just crazy.

Re: To hire neurodiverse workers, one firm got rid of job interviews

#408

Post by Grustaf » Tue, Oct 22, 2019, 10:29 AM UTC

romwell wrote: post #316

Grustaf wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve heard that lone wolf vs terrorist meme so many times, are there actually any studies on this, or even examples? I’m also not sure if being a “mentally ill” mass murderer is much better than a “terrorist” mass murderer.

If you are not sure, consider the same notions without mass murder attached to them. They are socially (and legally) in different leagues. >are there actually any studies on this, or even examples? Yes, there specifically are[1][2][3][4][...]. I'd suggest [1] as a start, and then Google is your friend. [1] https://insight.kellogg.northwestern.edu/article/when-do-peo... [2] https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2018-48477-00…

The conclusion in 1 seems to be "These findings indicate that stereotypes are not the only force at work when someone is labeled either mentally ill or a terrorist.", which is highlighted in a large font. I thought you were arguing the opposite?

And in 2, the question they examine is "whether people with negative attitudes toward Muslims perceive Muslim mass shooters as less mentally ill than non-Muslim shooters". That seems like a very biased group to ask, to say the least...

Re: To hire neurodiverse workers, one firm got rid of job interviews

#409

Post by soulofmischief » Tue, Oct 22, 2019, 11:55 AM UTC

RobertRoberts wrote: post #396

soulofmischief wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that you are even conflating Asperger's and ADD like this betray how little you know about the disorders. It's not just unscientific, it's insensitive. It's my own personal experience that Aspie/ADD people often can't understand how much pain they can cause other people. You listed your father and brother as evidence. Add maybe half a dozen more and that's your entire sample pool. It's amazing that you think…

My personal experience is valid to share. And it's not insensitive to share it. If you feel you have data that counters my experience, it would be good to share. Then we can discuss both sides.

Lol, you can't wrap your naive opinions as "personal experience" and then apply them to a generality of millions of people. You passed off this claim as real. Just because you frame it as personal experience doesn't suddenly make it not a form of prejudice, and doesn't suddenly make it correct and valid.

I don't need data to counter your "personal experience" a.k.a. anecdotal evidence, because it was never valid to submit as a claim in the first place. There is no "both sides", there is one side: the objective truth: ADHD is too complex for you to make ridiculous unbacked claims like that.

I have quite advanced ADHD, OCD and bipolar II disorder and I don't have problems with empathy; in fact, in my circles I'm known as an especially attentive listener. I'm a walking contradiction to your baseless claims.

So please, try again, this time without insulting an entire class of people by claiming we all fit your incomplete behavioral model.

Re: To hire neurodiverse workers, one firm got rid of job interviews

#410

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Oct 22, 2019, 12:17 PM UTC

soulofmischief wrote: post #409

RobertRoberts wrote: post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My personal experience is valid to share. And it's not insensitive to share it. If you feel you have data that counters my experience, it would be good to share. Then we can discuss both sides.

Lol, you can't wrap your naive opinions as "personal experience" and then apply them to a generality of millions of people. You passed off this claim as real . Just because you frame it as personal experience doesn't suddenly make it not a form of prejudice, and doesn't suddenly make it correct and valid. I don't need data to counter your "personal experience" a.k.a. anecdotal evidence, because it was never valid to…

[deleted]