501–510 of 586 posts
I was laid off during the recession and was "out of shape" in terms of algorithm and interview skills. There is a lot to know. The two previous interview cycles in my career were a completely different experience. I could probably leverage my personality more - in the pandemic it was just a zoom call. Now I do regular practice problems so I'm always ready. I actually recommend this. It looks something like this: Sund…
this is actually funny
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I think a lot of this is because our profession does not have an accepted universal bar everyone can jump over to be considered ‘qualified’. Credentialing organizations already exist[1], but none have lobbied the US government to prevent the uncredentialed from practicing. Perhaps it's time. If none of the existing orgs are good enough, start a new one. 1. https://www.computer.org/product/education/professional-sof…
Didn’t this exist with the PE designation in software engineering in the US? https://www.nspe.org/resources/pe-magazine/may-2018/ncees-en...
I looked at it briefly but realized that I would need to study a significant amount of engineering aspects (how much water can flow through this pipe type engineering) to be able to pass the first exam.
For people who are developers, while the ethics, principals, rigor and similar type aspects of the PE exam process are useful, that it is still focused on being a PE first and a PE with an Software specialization second means that most people who are software developers would not be able to pass it or find use in the additional engineering principals that it provides (you wouldn't want me to sign off of a building design... well, maybe if I studied enough to pass the FE exam first...)
So, first I'd have to take the FE Electrical and computer exam... https://ncees.org/wp-content/uploads/FE-Electrical-and-Compu... or go with the other disciplines exam - https://ncees.org/wp-content/uploads/FE-Other-Disciplines-CB...
Either way, there's a lot of material there that I don't know and I don't imagine most CS new grads would have a clue on.
And that's just the FE exam. After four years of under a PE, then the PE exam - https://ncees.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/SWE-Apr-2013.pd...
It's just not worth it.
It's because in software engineering your work product is confidential/proprietary and work samples take a very long time to produce. If you could review someone's code from their previous jobs, I think it would be quite easy to vet applicants. And it would be much easier to move from job to job. Instead we have to simulate work samples through whiteboard coding, pair programming sessions, take home coding projects,…
I disagree on 2 points: > It is much easier for product designers and product managers to pass interviews. You can see their work product. You don't see any more work of a product manager than of an engineer. What you see is always the finished product, and you have no idea who contributed what parts. If the overall product that can be publicly experienced is good, then some engineers in that team seem to have been d…
Most engineers need no more than half a dozen interviews to get couple of options to choose from.
Unfortunately, there is population that grossly overestimate their ability, don't prepare effectively at all and take as many interviews as they can thinking it is numbers game. Then blame "broken system".
It reminds me when I went for exam for driver's licence. There was a group of people complaining at the examiner and broken system after one person failed their 27th attempt due to some "silly" problem like almost running a pedestrian. I had fun noting they already all know each other and then I passed on the first try.
The people who complain the loudest are mostly ones like that. Clueless about what they are doing wrong, not willing to honestly retrospect and evaluate their situation, learn from mistakes.
This is their modus operandi. If you always try to find external cause of your problem where a lot of other people clearly succeed, there is a systemic problem with you that prevents you from effectively learning anything.
If this is you, I don't want to work with you. I want people who if they encounter same failure over and over again will eventually stop to think what they are doing wrong. Or who will not start by blaming compiler for their broken code (I had a coworker like that - total disaster).
The first step to solving a problem is admitting there is a problem.
The whiteboard problems we give are nothing out of ordinary. Unfortunately, they are also biggest filter as a lot of candidates who seem to know basics of Java can't write a simple function to specification. I understand some are due to stress even though I try as much as possible to relieve stress, give hints, etc. My boss once tried to listen to popular "advice" and get rid of whiteboard tasks. The next two hires were total loss and we had to fire them within 6 months. We are again giving whiteboard problems.
We made the interview process very simple and traditional in our current organisation. 30 minute chat, judge whether the person can do the job or is a good fit, if yes then offer a year contract with 1-3 months of evaluation period. Changing a job is risky also from the candidate's perspective so if the person is pretending, the lies will catch up. Most of the scenario it has worked pretty well. Sometimes, people who…
> if yes then offer a year contract with 1-3 months of evaluation period Contract work is a great way to find good talent, but it's a different candidate pool. Lots of good candidates can't or won't give up their full time jobs to take a time-limited contract job. Those who can take contract work are often more talented and more in demand, meaning they're less worried about finding another job if the contract isn't r…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> if yes then offer a year contract with 1-3 months of evaluation period Contract work is a great way to find good talent, but it's a different candidate pool. Lots of good candidates can't or won't give up their full time jobs to take a time-limited contract job. Those who can take contract work are often more talented and more in demand, meaning they're less worried about finding another job if the contract isn't r…
Isn't contract work looked down upon in the US? Here in the UK, its the opposite, contractors make atleast 2x the money, and most wouldn't dream of going back to salary position because no company wants to pay that for a permanent employee (apart from american companies and qaunt finance with nice bonuses)
There's the consultants who make the big bucks. They come in to solve a particularly thorny problem that an org has and then the contract is done and they move on.
There's also the staff argumentation contracts. We need six devs, but because of how accounting works, we can only hire two FTEs. However, contractors are part of an operations budget rather than a engineering budget... and so we can hire four devs as staff argumentation instead.
Another example of staff argumentation would be some place where there's a flex in the amount of work to be done. Long ago, I worked tech support. About 25% of the staff was FTE while the remaining 75% weren't. It was claimed that it was so that it would be easier to flex down (or up) when demand for the tech support slacked off or if it shot up (it did a few times go up with new OS releases).
The staff argumentation dev role is not as prestigious as a consultant.
I think a lot of this is because our profession does not have an accepted universal bar everyone can jump over to be considered ‘qualified’. Every technical interview feels like rolling the dice in proving I am a competent developer. Giving me 50 minutes in a high pressure situation in an environment i am unfamiliar with and people I just meet will never product my best results, and then add to the fact that I could…
I did an interview with Reddit - whom I hope sees this comment - and they not only provided zero information about the context of the tech interview in advance, or whether it would be one, but also the interview itself was like playing a random version of tech Jeopardy, but without the category columns, and very few of the questions had anything to do with the job I would be doing. I have over 20 years of programming…
We made the interview process very simple and traditional in our current organisation. 30 minute chat, judge whether the person can do the job or is a good fit, if yes then offer a year contract with 1-3 months of evaluation period. Changing a job is risky also from the candidate's perspective so if the person is pretending, the lies will catch up. Most of the scenario it has worked pretty well. Sometimes, people who…
They do it because they can't do honest work that will pay comparably to their scheme.
The only way to deal with them is to not let them in.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I did an interview with Reddit - whom I hope sees this comment - and they not only provided zero information about the context of the tech interview in advance, or whether it would be one, but also the interview itself was like playing a random version of tech Jeopardy, but without the category columns, and very few of the questions had anything to do with the job I would be doing. I have over 20 years of programming…
I had a similar interview with a different company last year. Three guys and me on a Zoom call with me sharing my screen trying to solve a coding problem that in no way resembled anything I have ever encountered in my 25 year career. When I got stuck they just stared at me. They would not give me any hints whatsoever. They just stared at me. When the interview was over I thought, "Is this how working with these guys…
> We as an industry really REALLY need to figure out a better way of conducting interviews.
if your an app dev: make me an app that does x, you have 60 min
if your a rails dev: make me a site that does y, you have 2hrs
if your a pdm: make me a spec and tickets for a system that does z
maybe i'm missing something but it shouldn't be too hard should it?
I interview candidates regularly. Most engineers need no more than half a dozen interviews to get couple of options to choose from. Unfortunately, there is population that grossly overestimate their ability, don't prepare effectively at all and take as many interviews as they can thinking it is numbers game. Then blame "broken system". It reminds me when I went for exam for driver's licence. There was a group of peop…
I worked at facebook, when I started looking for a new job, I had to start grinding leetcode again to prepare for a new job. Take a step back and realise how ridiculous this is.
Big companies that have prestiege and pay alot of money use it to eliminate false positives, not to actually recognise true positives. If your at a big company that can afford to throw away many true postives, sure use leetcode, but the rest are hurting themselfs by blinding following the mantra of FANG.