Let's also not forget the bias of Indians only hiring other Indians. There's entire product development teams in the Bay area that are close to 100% Indian. Sorry, I don't buy the excuse that's the only people available to hire. How does this relate to competence and the quality of the engineering work product? Race, gender, age, do NOT matter. So, why the pro-Indian bias?
I've noticed this trend in companies with Indian middle managers who tend to aggressively pursue hiring outsourcing firms (like Accenture) to bring in offshore Indian resources, and the project inevitably fails. Every time I've seen this, the decisions to hire the outsourcing firm never really made sense, so the easiest guess to make is the managers were receiving some kind of kickback, but we can only guess.
The software industry's greatest sin: hiring
531–540 of 590 posts
Re: The software industry's greatest sin: hiring
#532Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agree with all your points, I'm just coming from the perspective of how I embarrassingly hired a guy who could answer a lot of these questions but couldn't solve the problems we needed him to solve. And that, by switching to the "Hello, nice to meet you, okay let's open up Coderpad and solve this problem", as "inhumane" as it sounds, and I KNOW we will continue to see these forum threads for years to come, it actuall…
Obviously the way this goes down is different for each interviewee and each interviewer. I personally remember a lot of details from some of my favourite projects, but I wouldn't hesitate to say "let me grab my laptop and I'll show you" because it will be clearer. Then I'd walk the interviewer though all the details of the code, deployment, testing, etc. etc. etc.
Re: The software industry's greatest sin: hiring
#533Earlier quoted context omitted.
> DBAs becoming engineers Excuse me. Most of the top DBAs in Silicon Valley are former C programmers who probably are better programmers than you. I wish programmers would get over themselves. I've met CTOs who didn't know EXPLAIN. So who's the real engineer?
What is EXPLAIN?
https://docs.oracle.com/cd/B19306_01/server.102/b14211/ex_pl...
https://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.7/en/explain.html
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/sql-explain.html
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/sql/t-sql/queries/explain-t...
Re: The software industry's greatest sin: hiring
#534Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ok, but is that true of CS teaching? The best programmers I've worked with have mostly not had CS degrees (tended to have degrees in maths, physics, or that sort of area).
>The best programmers I've worked with have mostly not had CS degrees (tended to have degrees in maths, physics, or that sort of area). There's no you were rigorous enough in tracking this for this statement to be useful to anyone. The people who don't fit the mold stand out.
Sure, but has anyone claiming the opposite done rigorous analysis? Is there any evidence that having a CS degree makes for better programmers than not?
> The people who don't fit the mold stand out.
I'm not thinking about people who stood out as particularly unusual. Most of the time I didn't find out which field someone's degree was in until months into working with them.
Re: The software industry's greatest sin: hiring
#535Earlier quoted context omitted.
Both of your "taboo thoughts" seem blatantly obvious to me, and not especially taboo. Intelligence obviously exists and some people have more of it than others, even if the metric "IQ" doesn't perfectly capture it. And yeah, some people are not cut out to be programmers. Why are we pretending otherwise?
I find that there's a borderline self-contradictory aspect of hacker culture. While we romanticize the concept of the 10x programmer, which is an individual of genius, our culture also stresses the concept of autodidacticism. Teach yourself to code. Just use MOOCs. Build it yourself. Hack on an open source project. So there's this tension between valorizing the inborn superhuman and the belief that it's possible to r…
Those seem like orthogonal aspects. If we stressed the idea that you had to do (say) a 4-year degree at a great university, or something akin to the bar exam, would that be any more compatible with the idea that some people are 10x better than others? If anything I'd say the opposite: we'd expect most of the Harvard graduating class to be on roughly the same level, it seems a lot less wild that some self-taught people could be 10x better than others.
> So all of this, buttressed by real world labor demands, create incentives for people to try to become programmers. Even those who aren't "cut out to be programmers." Our increasingly cutthroat and unequal society also incentivizes people shifting to programming as a safe career choice. "Learn to code."
This happens in every field though? You get people who are desperate to become a doctor and apply to med school year after year, despite being completely unsuited to it. You get people who insist they're gonna make it as an actor/musician/comedian and spend decades working crappy day jobs so they can live where the action is, when really they'd be better advised to pick a career they're good at.
> I don't know how we can stop "pretending otherwise." Tech companies continue to complain about the engineering talent shortage. Bootcamps and online courses continue to promise people that they can become that talent. There aren't any agreed-upon industry standards by which to exclude people who truly aren't fit for it. FAAMG has infinite money and power in the industry to continue their entrenched practices. Most startups cargo cult the leading megacorps' processes. So instead, candidates are encouraged to continue grinding Leetcode and apply, apply again.
Well, if we told people outright that programming is a matter of IQ, and gave an actual IQ test rather than an IQ-like test in interviews, that might help some people realise it's not for them. You're right that what catches on in the industry is largely a function of what the most successful companies pick, but ultimately that list of top companies is not static and we'd hope that companies with better hiring practices will (eventually) rise to the top.
Re: The software industry's greatest sin: hiring
#536Earlier quoted context omitted.
What utter rubbish. I know several people with two PhDs - for example one guy who went from theoretical physics to economics - and they are all humble and brilliant. If I didn't have a family to support and a mortgage to pay, I'd consider doing a second PhD, given how much I enjoyed my first.
I imagine you're talking about a specific econometrics professor at McGill? I'd say he's extremely unique, it's far from the typical.
I also just had a double PhD apply for a job with me - one PhD in stochastic differential equations, one in machine learning.
It’s rare, for sure, but not unique.
Re: The software industry's greatest sin: hiring
#537We (me included) protect our egos like our lives depend on it. Very few people have the balls to just admit the interview went terrible because of themselves, it's always the person on the other sides (interviewer OR interviewee) fault.
Re: The software industry's greatest sin: hiring
#538Earlier quoted context omitted.
All of that should be illegal
Why? None of what he said suggests to me than an incompetent women would be hired over a competent man. The outrage over incentivizing minority hires is ridiculous to me. You’re more likely not to get hired because of random noise in the interview process than because you happened to apply at the same time as an equally qualified minority. If companies like google were actually actively discriminating against compete…
And it's always HR... they aren't impacted at all with ok:ish hires.
Re: The software industry's greatest sin: hiring
#539Earlier quoted context omitted.
It would be pretty nice if as an industry we could figure out how to apply the DRY principle to interviewing. It's the biggest waste of time for both for candidates and interviewers that we need to establish whether a candidate with 20 years of experience can write a for loop every time they apply for any job.
In my uneducated opinion, Google's hazing interview is not to establish whether one can write a for loop or not but to establish how dedicated one is to working at Google. An anecdote: I interviewed at Google ~10 years ago and failed. They did not ask anything complicated (I don't know if it was because the polices were different or they actually needed someone with my expertise) but I had a complete brain freeze for…
None of that is true of the interview. There is no notional standard. Assessments of the same person vary wildly from sample to sample. If you know the material, you are nevertheless expected to fail.
Re: The software industry's greatest sin: hiring
#540That's the good news.
The bad news is that tech interviews in the UK tend toward the same faux-IQ test mentality.
When are recruiters going to realise that just because you can reduce a person to a HackerRank score, that doesn't inform a good hiring decision?
I've often said the only way to see how someone is going to work out in an office is to hire them and let them work for a month on probation. After a month, if they've demonstrated an ability to talk, to collaborate, and to learn, then keep 'em. If not, cut 'em loose.
everything else in tech hiring is B.S. I have yet to see an alternative that can't be gamed, that takes in the holistic person.
And none of my jobs have really brought out the best in me. In jobs I've done well, I drove that myself. In jobs I didn't, it usually came down to bad communication (in both directions). Nothing to do with the recruitment at all.