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

My friends who cheated in interviews are getting promoted (2022)

teamblind.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 748 posts

Re: My friends who cheated in interviews are getting promoted (2022)

#181

Post by andybak »

knicholes wrote: post #129

If one considers Kant's categorical imperative, "Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law," then also considers how they'd feel if they were go to visit a doctor who had cheated or is cheating, one certainly must draw the conclusion that cheating is indeed immoral and undesirable.

My reading of the application of Kant's imperative to this is different to yours. The "universal law" here would be "cheating on a test for Amazon" rather than "cheating on any test for any job".

Re: My friends who cheated in interviews are getting promoted (2022)

#182

Post by euix »

I remember failing a Facebook SWE interview a couple years back after a few months of studying "Cracking the Code" and some other textbooks - I blanked out on a rather basic question in retrospect ("reverse a linked list in place). It never really occurred to me to cheat, at the time I just figured Facebook had a high precision and low acceptance method of hiring - I could probably do the job pretty well but I didn't show high enough "precision" in the interview so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.

I can tell an anecdote - when I took my qualifying exams in graduate school, every year there would be a different exam committee drawn from the faculty staff and their job was to come up with new questions. When I studied I looked at past exams going back 20 years and there was only a single question that was somewhat similar to a prior one - so cheating was quite impossible in the situation. People also underestimate the time and effort it takes to setup and design testing that is difficult to cheat. It's effort on the part of the testers and very hard to scale.

I used to design and interview for DS positions at my old job and I only had a question bank of 2-3 long form problems, in a case study style that I would use on all the candidates. The interviews are exhausting and it's a lot work because I have to personally "escort" each candidate through the problem and assess them qualitatively.

Re: My friends who cheated in interviews are getting promoted (2022)

#183

Post by bee_rider »

n4r9 wrote: post #142
bee_rider wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In that case, the market should take them out, right?

Amazon is large enough to maintain market dominance via strategies other than technical excellence.

So then why hire technically excellent people? They might expect excellent salaries or excellent working conditions.

Re: My friends who cheated in interviews are getting promoted (2022)

#184

Post by chii »

hermannj314 wrote: post #153
knicholes wrote: post #129

If one considers Kant's categorical imperative, "Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law," then also considers how they'd feel if they were go to visit a doctor who had cheated or is cheating, one certainly must draw the conclusion that cheating is indeed immoral and undesirable.

I'd rather my doctor look up an answer in a medical textbook rather than "not cheat" and allow me to die in adherence to the noble idea that only the ideas we can keep in our long-term memory are worthy.

but cheating indicates a lack of moral integrity, which might seep into the aspect of how they treat their patients.

Re: My friends who cheated in interviews are getting promoted (2022)

#185

Post by scarface74 »

paulryanrogers wrote: post #143
l2silver wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is gonna be a weak comment because I can't find references, but whatever. I remember listening to a podcast recently that compared boys and girls in school. The takeaway was that girls generally try to do all of the work, whereas boys were far more likely to take short cuts to success. And this was the reason why boys were doing better in university and afterwards. The conclusion of the podcast was that we shoul…

Shortcuts are great, until people get hurt or killed. That's why the phrase cutting corners is largely seen as negative, because it's associated with times when shortcuts caused harm. Regardless of gender it's useful to teach people endurance, prioritization, and how to judge when it's best to do everything vs only some things.

So who is being harmed by someone not reversing a binary tree by memory for an interview?

Re: My friends who cheated in interviews are getting promoted (2022)

#186

Post by ada1981 »

asimpletune wrote: post #115

Reading some of the comments in this thread I'm surprised. It seems that a substantial number of people think one of the following: a.) cheating on interviews is ok, because interviews don't reflect the actual job b.) this is acceptable because the promotion process is distinct from the interview process or c.) that the cheaters clearly are skilled after all because of all their success, as evidenced by being promote…

In many respects the world functions as it does because not everyone thinks and acts like that. Anytime there is significant power / resource asymmetry for any period of time, it seems it will eventually be captured by sociopaths / psychopaths.

Re: My friends who cheated in interviews are getting promoted (2022)

#187

Post by JohnFen »

fauxpause_ wrote: post #37
nevermindiguess wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The goal of interviews and assignments is not to achieve an outcome but to assess someone’s abilities. Henceforth, cheating cannot be justified.

If the assessment has no relationship to the job requirements then the test assessment cannot be justified either

That might be true, but is a different issue. It's certainly doesn't justify dishonesty.

Re: My friends who cheated in interviews are getting promoted (2022)

#188

Post by HDThoreaun »

nevermindiguess wrote: post #15
mattgibson wrote: post #3

TBF I don't think this is bad. The "cheating" involved seems a closer match to the actual real world conditions of the doing the job than the artificial "no internet allowed" assessment. If the candidates can get stuff done but need the internet as a reference, that's still getting stuff done. Not surprising that they are now getting promoted given they can not only get stuff done, but were resourceful enough to find…

The goal of interviews and assignments is not to achieve an outcome but to assess someone’s abilities. Henceforth, cheating cannot be justified.

> The goal of interviews and assignments is not to achieve an outcome but to assess someone’s abilities.

Maybe to the interviewer. But for the applicant the goal is to achieve an outcome.

Re: My friends who cheated in interviews are getting promoted (2022)

#189

Post by bloqs »

whitemary wrote: post #127
asimpletune wrote: post #115

Reading some of the comments in this thread I'm surprised. It seems that a substantial number of people think one of the following: a.) cheating on interviews is ok, because interviews don't reflect the actual job b.) this is acceptable because the promotion process is distinct from the interview process or c.) that the cheaters clearly are skilled after all because of all their success, as evidenced by being promote…

[flagged]

Please consider revising your future comments to not flame people. This is an emotional response to what the poster said, and frankly validates some of his point about the fierce loyalty to LLMs despite lacking understanding. You can happily challenge that in a dignified manner.

Re: My friends who cheated in interviews are getting promoted (2022)

#190

Post by mattgreenrocks »

hoosieree wrote: post #177
tristor wrote: post #160

I'm probably going to get roasted for saying this, but this is completely unsurprising to me. When I was in college, folks from India and other low trust societies would mercilessly cheat on their projects and exams, blatantly helping one another on individual works, and the college knew about it and didn't care. When I had brought this up at one point, I was told by a professor that it was a cultural difference that…

This is why I enjoy both woodworking and code golfing. There's an inescapable objective success or failure indicator that no amount of posturing can overcome. Either the code is short, or it isn't. Either the chair supports your weight, or it breaks. I think I enjoy these pursuits as an antidote to the kind of software I have to deal with on a daily basis - it's the kind that is so complex there are "no obvious defic…

Yup. I've gravitated towards difficult domains in my career because they serve as a very effective filter on the people actually applying for them, they keep me sharp, and people that have needs in these areas tend to less of the stereotypical "idea people," that are looking to milk those who can execute.
Post reply on HN