The rise of never-ending job interviews • Hacker News Board

Re: The rise of never-ending job interviews

#821

Post by mancerayder » Mon, Aug 02, 2021, 3:47 PM UTC

silisili wrote: post #119

My one and only Google interview went this way years ago. Each round they'd send me more books to study, which frankly I couldn't be bothered to read given the circumstances. My experience ended when an interviewer in round 3 or 4 asked me an obviously scripted question. I answered sarcastically, he got peeved, and I never heard from them again. I'm not claiming I'm Google caliber, whatever that means. Obviously I'm…

I skip any and all interviews that require math, algorithms, or anything else. First of all, I'm an infra / devops engineer and not a full-time software developer. Secondly, I've never used this stuff.

And thirdly - because it's a proxy for intelligence by people who think they're smart for having memorized sorting algorithms.

Who wants to work in a place where people who memorize things are conceived of as smarter than people who didn't memorize the same thing at the same time interval (i.e. cramming before interview or just out of college?)

Fuck those places, I'd rather work with human beings.

Re: The rise of never-ending job interviews

#822

Post by pram » Mon, Aug 02, 2021, 3:49 PM UTC

kevstev wrote: post #813

marcosdumay wrote: post #798

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Almost everybody with some Linux experience knows that the file name is not stored on the inode. It's not this part that makes the question bad. What makes the question bad is that nobody can guess what answer he wants, and anything else, as correct as it may be, will be understood as a mistake (what is evident by the OP's answers that were perfectly correct). "What number am I thinking right now" may be a really str…

My first linux install was Redhat 5.2 bought at a bookstore in ~1997. I have not always been a primary linux user, but I have been using it in some capacity for over 20 years now- though as a means to an end primarily- in the bad old days I mucked around with drivers and X configs and have even recompiled a custom kernel on occasion. Never once has it come up that the filename is not stored in the inode. I am actuall…

You'd never need to know anything about it as a user. I don't know how anyone could seriously make the argument otherwise.

In fact the only reason I know anything about inode and dentry specifics is because they are 'very clever' interviewer favorites! I've been a professional UNIX admin for 15 years and I've dealt with inode issues literally once in my life lol

Re: The rise of never-ending job interviews

#823

Post by gretch » Mon, Aug 02, 2021, 3:49 PM UTC

silisili wrote: post #119

My one and only Google interview went this way years ago. Each round they'd send me more books to study, which frankly I couldn't be bothered to read given the circumstances. My experience ended when an interviewer in round 3 or 4 asked me an obviously scripted question. I answered sarcastically, he got peeved, and I never heard from them again. I'm not claiming I'm Google caliber, whatever that means. Obviously I'm…

As someone who works at google, that guy has a stick up his butt. Sorry for your experience.

Re: The rise of never-ending job interviews

#824

Post by Twirrim » Mon, Aug 02, 2021, 3:50 PM UTC

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).

100%, speaking as someone who's been both sides of the equation in FAANG hiring.

Part of the problem is the sheer scale of hiring, but I think most of the problem comes down to the lack of feedback or evaluation mechanisms on the interviewing side.

They train you up, half a days worth, training tells you not to be an arsehole, not to ask stupid questions, not to have unreasonable demands of candidates, not to be biased. They don't train you in valuable skills like active listening.

Next thing you know, you've done training, and you're interviewing candidates every week or two (or more often), and there is zero feedback mechanism. No one evaluates your interview questions, no one asks candidates to provide feedback on the interviewers. No one looks to see if you've got unreasonable expectations as an interviewer, or have your expectations set too low.

You do have to do a post-interview group discussion with the other interviewers to make a yay/nay decision, but it's super easy to present what you did/asked in a positive light.

The whole system is designed around the interviewer being right and infallible. Is it any wonder the process is so completely and utterly broken?

edit: > or have your expectations set too low

This is where I bias towards in worrying, imposter syndrome and all that jazz. I've made a conscious choice to not raise that bar higher. I think the questions I ask are good, I think they're set up well enough to encourage candidates to go as deep as they feel comfortable with. I try to design them with no one true answer but have a few in mind so I can go where the candidate goes.

Re: The rise of never-ending job interviews

#825

Post by 6gvONxR4sf7o » Mon, Aug 02, 2021, 3:51 PM UTC

buro9 wrote: post #786

d0gsg0w00f wrote: post #749

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I honestly think this is a product of large corporations being essentially incapable of firing bad resources. Companies are terrified of litigation and bad PR so the only control mechanism is the interview process.

I do not disagree. The more people who interview, the more average the candidate has to be to succeed. For all the talk of "hire fast, fire fast" the reality is that most companies do not know how to evaluate someone within the probation time period in which they could let go of someone with ease (usually under 60 days) and after that they then fear doing so even when it's miserable for both the person (candidate) an…

> the probation time period in which they could let go of someone with ease (usually under 60 days)

Is this a thing? I would certainly judge a company doing this, and likely leave a manager who hired someone with an expectation that the beginning is just a probationary period, if I’m understanding you correctly (I hope i’m not).

Leaving a safe job for a probationary period puts too much risk on the employee that the employer doesn’t really share.

Re: The rise of never-ending job interviews

#826

Post by gmadsen » Mon, Aug 02, 2021, 3:55 PM UTC

enumjorge wrote: post #800

hmsshagatsea wrote: post #783

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I do agree the CA bar is tougher than it should be, a lot of the low passage rate comes from graduates of less-than-stellar schools. If you look into passage rate per school it’s naturally much better at the higher ranked universities.

Isn’t that almost the definition of gatekeeping? Make the process to enter the law profession so difficult that only students from select universities have a good chance. Of course prospective lawyers should clear a certain level of knowledge before they are allowed to practice, but the passing rate is puzzlingly low. CA law schools, as a group l, really only prepare such a low number of their students to practice?

shitty law schools has become a huge problem in the last couple decades. similar to ITT tech or phoenix online. They drastically lower the lsats needed to get in, then almost no one becomes an actual lawyer from that school, but they do get 100K in debt.

also, gatekeeping has a negative connotation because it is usually used when it seems unwarranted. If only schools with high quality education are passing students, that doesn't seem like a problem with the gate, but instead with the other schools. I absolutely want lawyers and doctors to be required to pass certain criteria.

Re: The rise of never-ending job interviews

#827

Post by nuclearnice1 » Mon, Aug 02, 2021, 3:56 PM UTC

flavius29663 wrote: post #793

mox1 wrote: post #771

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would you feel if you were going to a job as a writer, and the interviewee asked you to put a story, poem, etc. down on a napkin, with a crayon? Like thats how I would feel writing code into freakin google docs during a job interview...with Google. Tie 1 arm behind by back as the synax goes wonky, I'm fighting the spacing, etc. etc. Or put mario Andretti into a ford focus, then test his lap times, with 0 warning.…

> mario Andretti If you're a world champion, you would probably enjoy an exercise like this. This lady pilot sure did: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5KiC03_wVjc

What a delightful video! Unfortunately, her first time was 23 seconds over and she will not be getting a job on the Google racing team.

Re: The rise of never-ending job interviews

#828

Post by buro9 » Mon, Aug 02, 2021, 3:57 PM UTC

6gvONxR4sf7o wrote: post #825

buro9 wrote: post #786

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do not disagree. The more people who interview, the more average the candidate has to be to succeed. For all the talk of "hire fast, fire fast" the reality is that most companies do not know how to evaluate someone within the probation time period in which they could let go of someone with ease (usually under 60 days) and after that they then fear doing so even when it's miserable for both the person (candidate) an…

> the probation time period in which they could let go of someone with ease (usually under 60 days) Is this a thing? I would certainly judge a company doing this, and likely leave a manager who hired someone with an expectation that the beginning is just a probationary period, if I’m understanding you correctly (I hope i’m not). Leaving a safe job for a probationary period puts too much risk on the employee that the…

Some companies do "hire fast, fire fast"... so yes.

But I choose not to work for those companies, instead I prefer a strongly opinionated hiring process that won't play with anyone's life like that.

That said, treating probation as probation is definitely a thing. Especially in legal domains such as France and Germany. In the USA it's far less of a thing as employers can mostly let go of people at almost any time if they wish to and it's not a pattern of discrimination (though this is the fear of course, that a pattern could be formed).

Re: The rise of never-ending job interviews

#829

Post by meta4s » Mon, Aug 02, 2021, 4:03 PM UTC

enumjorge wrote: post #800

hmsshagatsea wrote: post #783

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I do agree the CA bar is tougher than it should be, a lot of the low passage rate comes from graduates of less-than-stellar schools. If you look into passage rate per school it’s naturally much better at the higher ranked universities.

Isn’t that almost the definition of gatekeeping? Make the process to enter the law profession so difficult that only students from select universities have a good chance. Of course prospective lawyers should clear a certain level of knowledge before they are allowed to practice, but the passing rate is puzzlingly low. CA law schools, as a group l, really only prepare such a low number of their students to practice?

Law school teaches you theory. The practical part is supposed to come from competitive internships.

The bar is hard for CA because we go to school for the theory and then no one really teaches you the formulaic way to answer bar essays. Add on top of that it's a lot of memorization and study. Most students I went to school with had egos and thought they had it in the bag only studying on the weekends.

Re: The rise of never-ending job interviews

#830

Post by Twirrim » Mon, Aug 02, 2021, 4:04 PM UTC

Lio wrote: post #716

cainxinth wrote: post #597

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re forgetting that it’s easier to get a FAANG job once you’ve already had one. They love to poach each other’s people.

If that's true it's at least is a change from the "no poaching" agreements that used to exist.

It's very true, and very natural. It's one reason why FAANG salaries have been getting so high.

If I change jobs, and find myself in a good situation, and need more head-count, I'm going to reach out to people I like that I've worked with before, see if they might be interested in a job change. I know I can work with them, know we'll build good stuff.

There's a constant drive in FAANG to hire more people, most teams have open headcounts. To the degree that it's extremely hard to build up that funnel of candidates. If my team has a head-count of 5, that realistically means I've got to find a bare minimum of 30-40 candidates to enter in to the pipeline from somewhere, to maybe get close to that target. That's a slightly optimistic conversion rate. Now scale that up across a company with thousands of teams that are hiring. Getting that pipeline filled on that scale is crazy. It's just one of many reasons why FAANG go all in on college hiring events.

I can almost 100% guarantee to get someone I've worked with in a FAANG co-worker through the interview pipeline and in to a job. They know their shit, they know what they're doing, and they know what the process is like.