Live data from Hacker News

We Only Hire the Trendiest (2016)

danluu.com

281–290 of 420 posts

Re: We Only Hire the Trendiest (2016)

#281

" Google bigwigs regularly talk about the hiring data they have and what hasn't worked. I believe they talked about how focusing on top schools wasn't effective and didn't turn up employees that have better performance years ago, but that doesn't stop TrendCo from focusing hiring efforts on top schools. " As far as I know, that doesn't stop Google from focusing hiring efforts on top schools. Anyway, I'm actually wond…

Yeah my brother was a VP at Intel, and always looked at the school first. Only top schools even got in the door for an interview.

Irony: he went to State U.

Re: We Only Hire the Trendiest (2016)

#282
post #45

One frustration I've had recently is the number of companies encouraging or requiring code in the public sphere. They want to see open-source contributions or an active and impressive personal github page. If your employer is protective of their IP ( mine is ) and/or you are not willing to spend evenings and and weekends on pet projects, you are out of the running. Also >But if you think programmers aren't elitist, t…

I'll be honest: if you have one person who spends 8 hours a day practicing a talent, and another who spends 10 or 12 hours a day practicing their talent, which is going to be better at that skill? Having lots of open source code to read demonstrates in public the prospect's talent for writing code, has examples of their collaboration with others, etc, but also simply means they spend more time writing code and gettin…

Time invested isn't linear with improved talent. We all have our own thresholds, but we all get diminishing returns after working/practicing so many hours in a day.

It also depends on the quality of time as well as the quantity. I'm a musician, and it's a fairly common trope to talk about practice in terms of efficiency, such as identifying "directed practice" and similar terms. I've experienced it myself: if I'm mindlessly playing the same passage over and over again, I won't improve nearly as quickly as if I stop and analyze why I'm making the mistake rather than just trying to force myself past it.

Re: We Only Hire the Trendiest (2016)

#283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it discriminatory? All else equal, isn't it clearly better to hire someone with no responsibilities outside of work, than someone who has to be out of the office at 5pm every day to deal with their kids?

> All else equal, isn't it clearly better to hire someone with no responsibilities outside of work, than someone who has to be out of the office at 5pm every day to deal with their kids? No it isn't clearly better. Note, I'm single but proposing that someone that lives code as being better than someone that stops to smell the roses of life is a bit too much. You're also discriminating for people that may be horrible…

> someone that lives code

> programmer that never goes out to socialize.

I never said that someone has to live and breathe work, only that they don't have anything _higher priority_ than work.

If I have social plans with my friends I'll likely cancel them if there's a bona fide work emergency. If I have family obligations I cannot and will not.

> I'd rather meet and make friends

OK, and I'd rather ski for an hour or two every weekday morning, then come home and shower and finally start working at noon.

I just don't see why I would expect the work opportunities available to me, and the compensation, to be no less than someone who doesn't have that requirement.

Having kids is a lifestyle choice that is at odds with other choices. If my preferred lifestyle is to be a starving artist/musician, or a ski bum, but I also want to have kids and so might have to suck it up and take a soul-sucking corporate job, no one is going to shed a tear for me.

But if instead of rocking out I just want to get the same jobs and paid the same salaries as people who are actually much more productive than myself, that's somehow not only reasonable but unimpeachable.

All it really is is another in a long line of examples of people with kids expecting special privileges and support for their personal lifestyle choices, not only from society at large (maybe reasonable) but from everyone, individually (not).

If you want society to subsidize having children, then the government should do it, not individual software teams.

Re: We Only Hire the Trendiest (2016)

#284
post #45

One frustration I've had recently is the number of companies encouraging or requiring code in the public sphere. They want to see open-source contributions or an active and impressive personal github page. If your employer is protective of their IP ( mine is ) and/or you are not willing to spend evenings and and weekends on pet projects, you are out of the running. Also >But if you think programmers aren't elitist, t…

> If I had my way this would be considered employment discrimination and grounds for a lawsuit.

I took issue with the tie stuff, myself, in another comment. It's unlikely to be discriminatory, except in the case -- as you mentioned -- of things that fall into the practice of religion. It's funny, though, how different sectors view the "tie in an interview". I know of many jobs where failing to show up in a tie to an interview will end the interview before it starts. I think software development is leaning in the other direction. And it's all a bit silly to a lot of us from the sounds of it. Standards exist for a reason -- if the tie-less interviewer showed up in a swimsuit with no shirt, I'd imagine he'd do worse than the guy wearing a tie.

As I mentioned in a previous comment, the issue is that someone is passing judgement on you as a candidate based on information that is unreliable to draw a conclusion from. My answer is to provide that information "My dad was a business owner and beat into my head that 'you wear a tie to an interview', plus I have far too many Jerry Garcia ties for how infrequently I get opportunities for wearing it" (I've even jokingly thanked an interviewer for the opportunity to dust off one of my favorite ties). If that doesn't satisfy my interviewer, I don't want the job. I can't manage a situation where "the rules for success" are so arbitrary/subjective that my choice to wear a very loud tie to an interview was enough to eliminate me from the selection process.

Part of it is probably the Garcia ties, thinking about it. They're very stylish, but bold, so while I can wear one to a really formal event and get compliments, the mention of a tie with a loose relation to The Grateful Dead communicates that I'm not much of a tie-kind-of-guy.

Re: We Only Hire the Trendiest (2016)

#285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be more charitable to the commenter's point, that's not what's being asserted as discriminatory. They're making the claim that it's implicitly discriminatory to penalize people who don't spend time on programming outside of work, because that reasonably penalizes people who are older (i.e. more likely to have a family). They are not making the claim that choosing to hire someone better than someone else is discrim…

Why is it discriminatory? All else equal, isn't it clearly better to hire someone with no responsibilities outside of work, than someone who has to be out of the office at 5pm every day to deal with their kids?

It may be clearly better if all you need a bunch of young and fast code typists. What about ability to make balanced pragmatic decisions, not based on fun or hype? What about mature communications, understanding of business? Understanding of technical dept, complexity?

Re: We Only Hire the Trendiest (2016)

#286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Various ES features will have different levels of support in different layers, and this is especially tough once you take into account the various transpilers or polyfills, and the big sticking points for me over the past two years have been ES imports and async New features will have varying support between implementations in any language. You have to take these differences into account even if you're writing fron…

> New features will have varying support between implementations in any language. You have to take these differences into account even if you're writing frontend-only code. For frontend, you use transpilers or polyfills to smooth over the differences between browsers. You then package these up, with rollup or webpack or whatever, and deliver to the client. My experience is that once you add backend to your list of su…

> For frontend, you use transpilers or polyfills to smooth over the differences between browsers. You then package these up, with rollup or webpack or whatever, and deliver to the client.

You still have to identify which polyfills you need, add them in, test them, etc. Polyfills are also quite buggy especially for new features from my experience. Also, the fact that you're typically running your build, packaging, linting, testing etc. on Node for your frontend code, says a lot.

> My experience is that once you add backend to your list of supported targets, you have to get quite a bit of new tooling in place.

When is that really even a consideration though? When do you actually need to deploy your frontend app to Node? If you have common model code, or say, input validation/sanitation, business logic, etc - that can easily be identical for both browser and Node.

> Backend code is generally not packaged before running, imports are done at runtime rather than build time, etc.

That really depends on your setup. You can do imports at runtime or build time for both Node and browser. If you're transpiling the setup is pretty much identical.

> I don’t know what kind of point that is, because it doesn’t matter to me that sometimes the frontend and backend will happen to run on the same engine.

How do you run your unit tests, your static code analysis, your packaging and traspiling? Do you run it in the browser or in Node? There is no fundamental difference between JS of the same version in Node vs Browser. Any browser specific or Node specific libraries/features you use are generally not part of any stable JS spec.

> it was super rare to see any code shared between frontend and backend.

Well I'm assuming these are different applications, so that's expected. I don't know why you wouldn't share your model definitions and/or validation/sanitation code though. People do this even for backends/frontends written in different languages.

Re: We Only Hire the Trendiest (2016)

#287
post #260

I think this is spot on. When I started in the 90s hiring was more like “you are smart so you will be able to learn”. Now it seems you really have to chase the latest cool stuff all the time or you quickly are marked as outdated. What they don’t seem to understand is that if you are the cool hotshot that’s working on an important project for a while you are almost by definition outdated after a while because you will…

The problem is the recruiters - how much justice would it be for someone to start a recruiting agency and say to applicants, 'oh you have recruiting experience? yeah...well, we're looking people with a different skillset.'

I think part of it is also the interviewing process. In general I like the idea of being interviewed by future colleagues but I have been in interviews where the interviewer had a really narrow perspective and there was only one right answer and only one valid approach to problem solving. I think interviewing should be taken seriously as a skill and interviewers should be trained more.

Re: We Only Hire the Trendiest (2016)

#288

I'm sorry but I find it very hard to believe that someone with "11 years in industry" would have any trouble finding a job in this market unless there is something extremely wrong with that person. You don’t create a network of personal relationships with other professionals in 11 years? That’s crazy!

Many developers simply don't take the time to cultivate a network or stay in touch after leaving. If you move cities or jobs, your old pals and supervisors can't offer you much help with a new potential job, other than being a good reference.

Re: We Only Hire the Trendiest (2016)

#289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please please please P L E A S E keep in mind that a lot of developers literally cannot work on many projects in their free time because the company they work for owns everything they do on and off company time. Even contributing to open source efforts can become an issue because you're expected to ask for permission first and it can become a sticky legal issue of ownership. Companies expect and want people to work o…

In 25 years of signing employment agreements, I've never seen one that said, "the company ... owns everything they do on and off company time." Yes, if you're working on a Foo and you write a Foo on your own time, you'll have an issue. Do you have any specific lawsuits in mind?

I turned down a job in Oregon this year because they wanted me to sign an IP assignment clause to that effect and refused to budge when I asked them to remove it.

Re: We Only Hire the Trendiest (2016)

#290
post #269
post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I can assume flip-flops would be a case of underdressing but I think that would be a bit ridiculous for any kind of interview regardless. That's what I said in my comment but would anyone reasonably show up like that in an interview? A suit may or may not be overdressing but flip-flops or anything like that would definitely fall below just "underdressing". It would just be unreasonable and offensive if you ask me (…

At Google I've interviewed candidates wearing flip flops and shorts in the summer. I barely noticed, and it didn't affect my thinking on them. Some people dress up, some don't. This isn't "wear whatever you want to an interview" advice, but a datapoint of "I can think of people doing that, and it was fine". (Disclosure: speaking only for myself)

> barely noticed, and it didn't affect my thinking on them. Some people dress up, some don't.

Of course this doesn't say anything about their technical abilities. But showing you care about the interview matters and flip-flops don't send that message. It's basically as close to no effort as it gets while still being allowed in public. I'm sure you'd find the same as a sign of unprofessionalism in many other fields even if the clothes have no effect on performance.

Post reply on HN