Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The rise of never-ending job interviews

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

571–580 of 1001 posts

Re: The rise of never-ending job interviews

#571

Post by bryanrasmussen »

burntoutfire wrote: post #335
speedgoose wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That confirms that we shouldn't bother if we value our time and energy.

Many people apply to all the FANGS, since the interviewing skillset needed is similar. Moreover, you can reapply every six months. In result, this gives you perhaps 5-10 lottery tickets every year, which means it's very feasible to get in within a year or two (or three).

>Moreover, you can reapply every six months. In result, this gives you perhaps 5-10 lottery tickets every year,

you are aware of the saying that the lottery is a tax on stupidity?

I guess that is perhaps a little harsh, but only a little.

First off, I don't think I would want to work at any place where getting in there is represented as winning a lottery ticket. Think of the poor oompa-loompas enslaved in Willy Wonka's factory.

Second off, perhaps it's just my vantage as a consultant in Denmark but everything I've read about working in Google has made me think it doesn't seem very enticing.

Third off, even when I was not married with kids I would not have wanted to spend so much time twice a year! How many unpaid hours a year are people willing to work for a lottery ticket that essentially pays out a top-paying job?

Re: The rise of never-ending job interviews

#572

Post by beberlei »

MrDresden wrote: post #472
smt88 wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your IDE can check your syntax. For people who have to switch between languages regularly, precise syntax memorization is difficult and a waste of time.

While I understand where you are coming from, I disagree. IDE tools are great performance enhancers, but they can also be crutches. I would always expect a professional software developer to be able to parse some code on a page and point out its syntax errors (as well as suggest edits). edit; here I am thinking about something more substancial then just a missing ';' or a lack of a closing "

Yes! Because the IDE cannot help in Github Pull Request reviews for example.

Re: The rise of never-ending job interviews

#573

Post by yarky »

gffrd wrote: post #188
yarky wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This makes me thing of the time I was interviewed by three bankers. I'd probably be rich and miserable had I answered non sarcastically :/

The suspense is killing me. What was the question, and how did you answer?

Oh don't worry it wasn't just one question but the whole interview. One I remember was how would I explain [insert random algorithm] to a board of decision makers, I made it sound like I was explaining a 100 year old how to turn on a computer.

I had no interest in ever "explaining" stuff to non-technical people at that time, all I cared about was the code. So I also trolled one of the guys interviewing me since I happened to be stuck with his legacy "code", which made me judge him and take him with absolutely no seriousness: he was one of those "cfa" people who learnt how to "code" a line of VBA and think they're Linus.

I also remember the face of the HR person who was like wtf the whole time and politely told me they had "chosen" another person for the job, I laughed inside and politely answered that I understood.

I recommend against this behaviour to past me anyways ;)

Re: The rise of never-ending job interviews

#574

Post by killtimeatwork »

xvector wrote: post #463
killtimeatwork wrote: post #460

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not that stupid from company's point of view - they're preselecting for people who really want the job, and have enough energy to pursue it. These are the people you want to for your company.

Strange that this only seems to be necessary in the software industry while literally every other industry seems to be getting along fine without these dehumanizing interview processes.

Software industry is also paying much more that most other industries. Maybe it's special in some way?

Re: The rise of never-ending job interviews

#575

Post by dsr_ »

ljm wrote: post #550
trinovantes wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I once had an in-person interview where they gave me a sheet of printed code and asked me to point out the syntax errors. Some interviewers are absolutely insane.

I had to review someone's PR for one interview. Ultimately I failed it because me feedback focussed solely on implementation details and asking if there are better ways to solve the problem (with some suggestions as a nudge). Apparently, that was fantastic and showed all the qualities of good coaching...but they expected me to point out all of the instances of poor indentation and other aesthetic things. My justifica…

"if I didn't flunk that interview then I wouldn't be where I am now"

This is, I think, the closest thing there is to a universal experience in this field.

Followed closely by "how did I miss that single-character error?"

Re: The rise of never-ending job interviews

#576

Post by jcims »

ashtonkem wrote: post #65
kinkrtyavimoodh wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Job training is not as much worth it for companies when employees can switch jobs at the drop of a hat.

People change jobs at the drop of a hat for reasons that are well within companies' control. It's not like people want all that stress and hassle, they do it because they're incentivized to do so.

Sometimes. Other times they are just sampling what's out there to see what suits them the best, or playing the comp boost game until even their best face forward isn't able to garner a higher offer.

Re: The rise of never-ending job interviews

#577

Post by jiggawatts »

keyb0ardninja wrote: post #557
AJRF wrote: post #469

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Geohotz had a good rant about this once - the kind of people who need to cram leetcodes and memorize algorithms are not the kinds of people who Google wants to pass these interviews. Makes a lot of sense, you could solve all these questions without knowing specific algorithms as long as you are good at problem solving - which is, I assume, the intent of the process. Obviously it doesn't always work like that.

> Makes a lot of sense, you could solve all these questions without knowing specific algorithms as long as you are good at problem solving - which is, I assume, the intent of the process. You could solve all these questions as long as you are good at problem solving, *given enough time*. However, with tight time constraints and perfomance pressure, the only way you could solve all these questions is memorizing and pr…

There was a hilarious rant about a FAANG hiring question that was something like: "Write an algorithm for detecting if a linked list has any loops in it, in linear time, using a constant amount of memory."

Apparently the correct answer is to use "Robert W. Floyd's tortoise and hare algorithm", which is trivial to explain and code.

The catch?

It took a decade of computer science research between the original statement of the problem and Floyd discovering the solution.

So... no worries, you have an hour, a marker, and a whiteboard. Your time starts: now.

Re: The rise of never-ending job interviews

#578

Post by OOPMan »

XorNot wrote: post #264
ladberg wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had a similarly bad Google experience that I've talked about before[0] but will copy here: I was asked to do a task that eventually boiled down to a topological sort, and I thought the question consisted of recognizing that the answer was a topological sort and moving on because it was over the phone. However, that was not the case. The interviewer wanted me to code it all out over Google Docs, but I didn't remembe…

At this point I'm pretty sure FAANG hiring is just a random walk. Every now again someone happens to have looked at all the questions they ask recently for that particular interview cycle (or avoid the trap ones like that) and that person gets hired (and then put on the ad targeting team or whatever).

My profile on LinkedIn for the longest time stated "No PHP jobs please" as a way to weed out recruiters that would send me job offers for PHP roles on the basis that I once did some PHP.

I've updated the profile to include "No FAANG companies" because I'm pretty sure I would not be a good fit for them but that didn't stop their recruiters from pestering me.

Re: The rise of never-ending job interviews

#579

Post by js4ever »

In 2007 I had 13 interviews with Microsoft before finally being rejected at the last step. Reason invoked was "Not enough corporate spirit". That was my last rounds of interviews, since then I have my own consulting company and never regretted this failure, quite the opposite in fact :)

Re: The rise of never-ending job interviews

#580

Post by VonGallifrey »

lrem wrote: post #434
janoc wrote: post #404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Famously even if you know the answer pretty well, say because you were the original creator of the thing, but answer in a way that they can't link to the answer key, you still fail. Which is the most ridiculous part of it. You are being examined and evaluated over trivia in a subject that the examiner likely has no idea about and where there are only 1-2 possible "correct" answers. That's like sending a janitor to "…

What alternative would be more efficient and acceptable? A typical team of 6-8 replaces two persons per year. The number of resumes per opening is measured in thousands.

> A typical team of 6-8 replaces two persons per year.

How is this fact not seen as a complete failure of hiring practices or company/team leadership?

Post reply on HN