221–230 of 298 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One answer to your last: people aren't going to leave their permanent job for one that has a risk of being temporary.
If you make it as far as internship to hire, the company is signaling more of a commitment than just temp work. It's basically like a probationary period. Also this would be especially good for graduates with little work experience.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Even if the process were a reasonable proxy for IQ (it's not), or correlated somewhat with use of actual required technical skills (it doesn't) I wouldn't be so quick to presume that FAANG IQs aren't above average. >the EQ (emotional intelligence) and CQ (cultural intelligence) factors which comprise the other 2 legs of the "good hire" stool EQ may be difficult to measure but the spoken part of the interview should…
One answer to your last: people aren't going to leave their permanent job for one that has a risk of being temporary.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The tech interview process is just so badly messed up. Even if the process were a reasonable proxy for IQ (it's not), or correlated somewhat with use of actual required technical skills (it doesn't), it still almost entirely ignores the EQ (emotional intelligence) and CQ (cultural intelligence) factors which comprise the other 2 legs of the "good hire" stool.
>Even if the process were a reasonable proxy for IQ (it's not), or correlated somewhat with use of actual required technical skills (it doesn't) I wouldn't be so quick to presume that FAANG IQs aren't above average. >the EQ (emotional intelligence) and CQ (cultural intelligence) factors which comprise the other 2 legs of the "good hire" stool EQ may be difficult to measure but the spoken part of the interview should…
Google also offers associates or something similar to that. But it's for much longer, 6 months or a year.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is the part of the document that described the motivation: > The Problem Statement > Based on 177 like tech companies in Silicon Valley (market research and EOO-1 Diversity Statistics data), the percentage of diverse engineering talent is sparse. In short, 4.7% are latino, 2.1% are African American, and 19.2% are female. These candidates are being targeted with all of our top competitors with white gloves tactic…
Thanks for the update. It is an interesting read. I used to think naively that checking these boxes does nothing: - "I prefer not to disclose my sexual preference" - "I prefer not to disclose my race/ethnicity" - "I prefer not to disclose whether I'm a veteran or not" Anyway, it is a sad read for people like me who don't get preferential treatment. It seems like I'm being salty, but it is just the reality. People lik…
your competition is not women or minorities. it's other majority groups, because more of them are interviewed and hired.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Are you patient enough to sit through questions like "how many kegs of beer on a schoolbus" and "how to build a datacenter on the moon" from some grinning techbro only to be told youre re-invited to another round of interviews? I systematically end all interviews when they've reached this point. As soon as the smart-ass finishes their stupid question I just say "I think we're done here". I can stomach take homes, e…
What was their response after you said "I think we're done here?"
One time the guy got half angry, started defending his process and just walked me out. Another time they tried to move on to the next interviewer and I just said I wasn't interested anymore, it would be a waste of time.
Obviously I never got a positive response after saying that. I still dream of the day when the interviewer will shout "that's right! That was the test! You passed!" :)
I had a conversation with a fellow engineer and we pretty much concluded that our current company would not hire us with our current resumes if we had to go through the interviewing process. And we are generally viewed as some of the higher performers. I bet the same is true for a lot of other companies.
I'm of the mind that most interview questions can only reliably identify people who are not capable of coding, and roughly gauge the algorithms knowledge. I had floated the idea of making interview experiences that more closely resemble work, like having the candidates make PRs in a mock repository. Better yet we could see not just how they make a PR but also review PRs and make comments. But often the primary concern is logistical. It's easy to train people up on 1-hour problems with a grading rubric, than a longer more open ended interview.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The tech sector is 80/20 because of hiring bias in the population that defines the workplace demographic. And evidence of that is...? Graduates in the fields of study that feed into the tech workforce are 80/20 - why do we conclude that the industry is biased when it is representative of the population that chooses to go into tech? A valid response is to say that men and women's choices of study are the product of…
Yes, underrepresentation of the population is literally the definition of bias. Unless you want to go with the tautological nonsense you're doubling down on. And you're once again insisting that racial slurs are just as bad as diverse hiring. Really vying for Grand Dragon, eh? I'm sure that if you just explain, once more, in even lengthier detail, how that totally isn't racist, it'll stop making you look like a repre…
It's literally not.
Men account for 90% of convictions for homicide and other serious forms of violence in the US, and the overwhelming majority of countries abroad. Is that evidence of overwhelming misandry and bias in criminal justice? There's been demonstration of some bias, IIRC men tend to get 40-60% longer sentences. But that's nowhere near enough to account for this disparity. The reality is men do commit more violence than women and the disparity of men in prison for violence so this overrepresentation of men is not the product of bias, but rather men's own decisions.
Similarly, women make up the majority of professions like speech pathology, education, publishing with some of these over 90% female. Do we conclude that this is because of rampant bias against men? Perhaps, but in order to prove that we'd have to prove that these institutions prefer female applicants over male applicants. A non-bias explanation is that 90% of applicants are female, because 90% of people who want to go into these jobs are women.
Not only is underrepresentation not evidence of bias, the lack of underrepresentation does not absolve a group of bias. For instance, say a tech company decided it wanted to have an engineering workforce representative of the general population with respect to gender. 20% of the applications it gets are from women, so the company randomly throws away 75% of the male applications to make it so that an equal number of people go on to the phone screen, and subsequent on-site. This produces an engineering workforce that is perfectly representative of the population's gender distribution. But it is overwhelmingly biased against men and in favor of women. Obviously real-world tech companies are rarely this extreme - I've personally only seen OKRs calling for 33% at most. The point is, force equal or closer-to-equal outcomes in spite of unequal decisions made by people often entails the creation of bias, rather than its elimination. Do you really think that a company can achieve 50% women in tech without biasing their interview process in favor of women? The only company that even gets close to 50/50 practices explicit quota hiring:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ThoughtWorks#Hiring_and_divers...
Ultimately, at this point I think your conception that bias has a 1:1 relationship with representation relative to general population is fundamentally different from mine in a way that makes it difficult to productively explore the value of affirmative action in the hiring process.
This is so silly. Here's teh secret: your programming ability is set genetically by how much Yeti blood you have in your ancestry. Yeti half-breeds recognize each other (often unconsciously) by smell. That's why some people can get programming jobs hella easily while others just can't even after strenuous training. Check your feet. If your second toe isn't longer than your big toe you're screwed. Give it up. You migh…
How do the Yetis get onsites to smell one another?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thanks for the update. It is an interesting read. I used to think naively that checking these boxes does nothing: - "I prefer not to disclose my sexual preference" - "I prefer not to disclose my race/ethnicity" - "I prefer not to disclose whether I'm a veteran or not" Anyway, it is a sad read for people like me who don't get preferential treatment. It seems like I'm being salty, but it is just the reality. People lik…
"preferential treatment"????? your baseline is privileged. diversity hiring is attempting to negate reduced or lack of privilege. your competition is not women or minorities. it's other majority groups, because more of them are interviewed and hired.
Furthermore, this policy announced when the company's tech workforce was already higher than the industry's representation in the metro area. So they were using discrimination to increase an already existing overrepresentation.
After 9 years at the same company, I left my job at the beginning of January 2020 to dedicate myself to leetcoding and interview practicing in the hope of getting hired at a FAANG, more specifically Google. I really started dedicating all my time to interviewing January 1st. It is now March 31st and I am now abandoning the idea of getting hired at a FAANG, or any larger-sized startup and will target early startups wi…