51–60 of 1001 posts
Huh, the only successful interviews I have are the ones where I'm burned out after a long, fruitless, frustrating job search. And so I walk in assuming the interview will be a waste of time and just not caring anymore. That's when I get an offer.
Huh, the only successful interviews I have are the ones where I'm burned out after a long, fruitless, frustrating job search. And so I walk in assuming the interview will be a waste of time and just not caring anymore. That's when I get an offer.
> In short, the findings suggest that companies are missing out on really good programmers because those programmers aren’t good at writing on a whiteboard and explaining their work out loud while coding. In most of my programming jobs, explaining your work was most of the job and writing code was less important. The whiteboard environment is a bit unnatural but I don’t want to hire someone who gets the right answer…
Versus explaining your code to your coworker whom you've worked with for the past X time who understands some of your eccentricities or idiosyncrasies and without a pass/fail judgment lingering over your head like a sword of Damocles.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People can smell desperation, and rightly or wrongly, it pushes them away.
Haha. So the more driven and hungry i am the worse ill be viewed. The more silver spoon and apathetic ill be cherished. Sounds like dating ;)
It doesn't hurt "the industry", there's a competitive edge to hiring otherwise superior engineers that are passed up by poor hiring practices at certain companies.
Not everybody needs to work at FAANG, or worse, companies that act like they're FAANG. Less money, less bullshit.
The methodology: > For this study, researchers conducted technical interviews of 48 computer science undergraduates and graduate students. Half of the study participants were given a conventional technical interview, with an interviewer looking on. The other half of the participants were asked to solve their problem on a whiteboard in a private room. The private interviews did not require study participants to explai…
I appreciate their effort to use science to support the narrative that tech interviews suck, because I do think they suck and need to change, but isn't N=48 a little small? Also, if it was only undergraduates or graduates, who's to say their performance is indicative of the rest of the tech workforce?
To acquire a larger N would mean recruiting more participants, which would require either compensation/extra credit or rely on people volunteering ~1 hour of their time. Likewise, collecting that data would require time and money. It is an time/resource issue with human research. You can require a small N and get some results or require a large N and not have enough funding to support it.
Also note, what is a "large N"? There is no set in stone amount and I've even seen reviewers say a sample size of 10,000 is too small.
Huh, the only successful interviews I have are the ones where I'm burned out after a long, fruitless, frustrating job search. And so I walk in assuming the interview will be a waste of time and just not caring anymore. That's when I get an offer.
This was true for me, too. My previous startup I worked at had gone under, and I was thinking about starting my own. An old coworker of mine invited me to lunch. We had a couple of margaritas, and he asked if I wanted to see his office. I went to check it out, and suddenly he asks if I can talk to some of his coworkers. So I basically interviewed while drunk and not fully realizing I was being interviewed. They offer…
Some companies stress interpersonal fit over technical ability, as you are initiated in "the Culture."
Huh, the only successful interviews I have are the ones where I'm burned out after a long, fruitless, frustrating job search. And so I walk in assuming the interview will be a waste of time and just not caring anymore. That's when I get an offer.
My first time interviewing with Google (in 2008), the press was reporting that they were in a hiring freeze, I had no big names on my resume, so I figured it was basically hopeless and I'd just do the best I could and enjoy my trip to Silicon Valley. After my interview, I was like "Well, I did okay, but you really have to be perfect to work at Google and I wasn't perfect. I'm never coming back to California anyway, so I might as well do all the tourist stuff [I'd held an extra day to interview with Twitter, but they ended up not moving forwards with my candidacy] and just treat it as an all-expenses paid trip to SF." So I just went to Alcatraz and Fisherman's Wharf, treated myself to a nice dinner, and took the red-eye home to Boston. As I'm groggily waking up after a post-red-eye nap, the Google recruiter called me to say "Your interview feedback looks great. We'd like to fast-track your application on the assumption that the hiring committee will say yes."
Been living in California for 11 years now, and I just started back at Google after working there for 5.5 years, leaving, and doing startups for another 6. The most recent round of interviews was the same - I was super nervous for Lyft, Stripe, Coinbase, Netflix, etc. and ended up not getting the job, but with Google it was like "Hey, I worked there once, I know people who also know my interviewers, I used to give interviews like the one I'm sitting in now, what's the big deal?"
At my current job, we have our candidates do a short take-home assignment to assess coding skill, but we also have them do a live presentation to assess their pre-sales skills and ability to present under pressure.
We try to separate the two tests to get a better read on the two skill sets we're looking for. So far we've hired strong candidates. We prioritize avoiding false positives over false negatives; in other words, we prioritize turning candidates away over hiring someone we're unsure about.
It was made the clearest to me when I interviewed a colleague who had left to another company and two years later was interviewing to return. I knew he knew everything and had the skills for the job because, well, I know him, I’d worked with him before. He’d done this very job previously. Yet he still performed terribly in the interview and (rightly or wrongly) I had to base my evaluation on my knowledge of him rathe…
I feel in the tech industry, networking and knowing people only gets you so far - typically just to the whiteboard interview. Then you have to solve the leetcode problems just like everyone else. Especially so in larger companies. FWIW, all of my friends who somehow managed to get into FAANG or other top tech companies swear that were they to go through the interview again, odds are they would fail. This despite all…