Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can choose to make X (what's tested for in the interview) a representative cross section of the harder things that you need. Or don't even try and make X not even intersect with anything you need. It still puzzles me how many people opt "don't even try".
I see what you mean, but in my experience there's this tendency where you think you're testing for "X", but you aren't really. A whiteboard FizzBuzz might be actually testing for memorization, deliberate interview prep, extrovert tendencies, etc. And not for any kind of actual technical skill. Failing the FizzBuzz could also just mean high social anxiety.
Technical interview methods pale in comparison to playing Factorio with someone
51–60 of 358 posts
Re: Technical interview methods pale in comparison to playing Factorio with someone
#52Re: Technical interview methods pale in comparison to playing Factorio with someone
#53Re: Technical interview methods pale in comparison to playing Factorio with someone
#54How can this not have a huge bias in favor of gamers? Might work for them because that's the kind of culture fit they need, but I doesn't look all that generalizable for other companies.
I'm D tier programmer who would easily land a programming job if factorio was the skill metric.
Re: Technical interview methods pale in comparison to playing Factorio with someone
#55I used Zachtronic's TIS-100 [0] as a test variable and found the best person to work with. I believe it was a two way street because they saw an opportunity to work with someone who attacks problems a little differently. I am in real estate. Who would have thought knowing something about assembly would be helpful?
Re: Technical interview methods pale in comparison to playing Factorio with someone
#56How can this not have a huge bias in favor of gamers? Might work for them because that's the kind of culture fit they need, but I doesn't look all that generalizable for other companies.
You only have to understand how to move your character using WASD, the concept of Inventory and pointing at different places on the ground with a cursor. Failing to understand this simple set of rules would disqualify a person from most jobs ever invented.
I think you dramatically over-estimate most people's literacy with games and movement in a virtual space, let alone most people's hand-eye coordination. How many people can touch type these days?
Re: Technical interview methods pale in comparison to playing Factorio with someone
#57An amusing thought experiment but obviously it would have catastrophic consequences in real life... Pretty much anyone can get good at the game by watching Let’s Plays or reading guides.
Re: Technical interview methods pale in comparison to playing Factorio with someone
#58I think it is remarkably effective at identifying the kinds of skills and personality traits that a software engineer actually needs to have in day-to-day work. You can find out if someone is self-directed, how fast they work, whether they produce clean designs or spaghetti code, whether they are good at cooperating or tend to go off on their own, etc. Some people will just sit and watch and do nothing unless instructed... that's bad. Some people will build stuff, but with obvious efficiency flaws and "bugs"... also bad. Some people identify what needs doing and get it done effectively but without trying to be perfect... that's good. Factorio essentially compresses real-world work patterns into a shorter time period, giving you the chance to see how someone works in the space of a couple hours. I don't know anything else that does that.
But, obviously, it's problematic. A person who has played the game before will have a big advantage. A person who doesn't play video games at all will have a big disadvantage. For these reasons, I don't think I could seriously recommend this approach be adopted more widely.
But then, I don't know of any approach to interviewing that I think is fair. Everything has problems:
* Regular interviews bias towards people that are charismatic, not effective.
* Coding interviews bias towards people who can code under pressure with someone looking over their shoulder, which is almost nothing like real-world coding.
* Puzzle-y algorithms questions identify people good at clever solutions but that's hardly what most people need to do day-to-day when coding.
* Take-home assignments bias towards people who have lots of free time, and still don't really tell you how that person works with others.
* Looking at GitHub history biases against people whose lives are too busy to code in their free time (e.g. maybe they have kids) and who weren't lucky enough to have a previous job that touched a lot of open source.
* Looking at past work experience misses brilliant junior programmers coming out of college.
* Don't even think about using ML for this, that doesn't solve biases, it just hides them in a black box.
It seems like there's no right answer here.
Re: Technical interview methods pale in comparison to playing Factorio with someone
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm D tier programmer who would easily land a programming job if factorio was the skill metric.
If you're actually D tier, and you're good at Factorio, why are you a D tier? You clearly have the mindset for problem-solving. What is holding you back?
Re: Technical interview methods pale in comparison to playing Factorio with someone
#60This winter break I spent an embarrassing amount of time on Satisfactory on Steam, which is essentially a nicer (and probably easier) modern refresh of Factorio. While I played, I came to similar conclusions to the article. Building factories in this game is very very similar conceptually to building software. I ran into exactly the same problems that I ran while I build software like: - If I don't plan ahead enough…
+1 on this. I could never get into Factorio with the simple graphics and 2D top-down. Satisfactory is freakin incredible and it is easily the best new game I have played in the last 10 years.