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

601–610 of 748 posts

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

#601

Post by 11101010001100 »

BeetleB wrote: post #541
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…

> Luckily, my professor was right though, despite exposure to a lot of negative behaviors I don't like, don't respect, and don't endorse, I did excel and I continue to excel above my peers, especially those who cheated. Disagree from my experience. When I was a TA in grad school, I had a PhD student who clearly had access to the instructor's solution manual. His answers were copied verbatim. If the solution's manual…

Reminds of the billionaire who cheated in chess against Vishy.

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

#602

Post by archagon »

goodSteveramos wrote: post #599
archagon wrote: post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not OP, but to be clear, "low trust society" has a specific sociological meaning relating to interpersonal trust: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_trust_and_low_trust_socie... It doesn't mean that individuals from that society are less trustworthy.

It isn’t defined that way, but yes it is strong evidence that people from that society are less trustworthy. People are less trusting when others are more likely to cheat them.

"Strong evidence" = your feelings?

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

#603

Post by [deleted] »

TeeMassive wrote: post #457
tristor wrote: post #414

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like all observations, they are reflective only of the individuals observed, even if a pattern emerges. 17% of all people in the world are Indian, India alone has 1.4B people, and that doesn't even count the hundreds of millions of Indians in the diaspora around the world. Nothing you could possibly say about Indians is true for every person in that group, because the group is so large that it necessarily includes ev…

[flagged]

[deleted]

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

#604

Post by dang »

_7tgr wrote: post #593
btilly wrote: post #562

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm glad you've never cheated, and hope this becomes more common in the future. But you're fighting an uphill battle to expect people not to possess prejudices based on what is statistically likely. People will believe the evidence of their eyes. The most you can hope is that people not act on their prejudices before getting to know you. And, as unfair as it is that you can't change it, you'll have to find ways to li…

Can’t believe I have to state this explicitly, but I am on Hacker News, after all-- scraping the bottom of the barrel here. It is absolutely reasonable to ask people to reconsider their prejudices. Your line of thought does nothing but reinforce people’s existing biases without leaving room for the nuance of social context. Racists misuse statistics all the time to justify their awfulness. Consider whether you’re rea…

I'll stick up for btilly here - I don't think you've read his comment fairly, and instead are criticizing something he didn't say. He didn't say, or imply, that people shouldn't be asked to reconsider their prejudices. Of course they (or we, rather) should.

This is covered by the HN guidelines, which ask: "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith."

I could imagine a criticism of btilly's post on the basis that it didn't really meet the GP's experience, didn't show empathy (though I think he was trying to be helpful, not mean), and didn't contribute anything positive, just "you'll have to find ways to deal with it". A better comment might have been more constructive and less coldly generic. But those aren't the criticisms you've offered.

Instead, you crossed into personal attack and snark with your last two sentences. Those things are definitely against the rules here, so please don't do them. It's always possible to make your substantive points without that, and you're of course welcome to do that instead.

No matter how low in the barrel HN is or you feel it is, there's always room to sink lower! That's why we have guidelines—to try to stave off further sinking. If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and posting in the intended spirit, we'd appreciate it.

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

#605

Post by scarface74 »

lesuorac wrote: post #596
scarface74 wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So when was this? When European businesses were exploiting the “new world”? When plantation owners were employing slaves? When robber barons were exploiting people and polluting the environment? The “greed is good” 80s? VCs throwing money at startups that they know will never be profitable waiting for the “greater fool”?

I mean didn't the greater European community as a whole benefit greatly by access to the materials found in the "new world" (and also Asia)? Plantations is a bit vague but to assume Cotton; people benefited tremendously from cheaper clothes. A lot of the early industrial revolution was weaving machines which wouldn't be possible without a lot of cotton. Robber barons is a bit vague but to assume railroads; people ben…

> mean didn't the greater European community as a whole benefit greatly by access to the materials found in the "new world" (and also Asia)?

At the expense of killing millions?

At the expense of killing and enslaving millions?

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

#606

Post by rdtsc »

voakbasda wrote: post #303
tristor wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they also need to fix their process to actually test skills. If we're being honest, LC style interviews aren't even about testing skills, it's trying to proxy for testing raw intelligence (or at least the ability to remember and regurgitate lots of facts). If companies could just IQ test people and hire by IQ, there'd be a lot less weirdness in interviews, but that's illegal (and probably rightly so).

If a LC interview effectively serves as a proxy for an IQ test, then I think the courts might treat it the same as a literal IQ test. I wonder if we will see lawsuits testing this hypothesis.

If they can proven to be so. What employees do is then build a proxy for IQ tests that has some job related stuff. Math or logic puzzles could be used if they relate to CS topics. It's not just "find the next element in the pattern" but "find the next sorted item in a list" and so on. They could argue that "Well the employee could in principle be inverting binary trees all day at their job..."

I bet many involved in designing and setting the requirements know exactly how it works but they'd use veiled language and never put anything down in written communication.

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

#607

Post by bumby »

yCombLinks wrote: post #216
scarface74 wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes because Americans never cheat to get ahead and we are all morally superior…

There's a very well studied decline in trust in America over time. Despite your snark no one claimed we never cheated etc. It's just getting much worse

Does this correlate with the increase in polarization? I know Jonathan Haidt has spoken about his research on the increase in polarization is America.

If that correlation exists, it may point to an alternative hypothesis to the GP claim that the issue is rooted in those coming from "low trust" societies and due to an internal mechanism.

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

#608

Post by scarface74 »

gumby wrote: post #574
scarface74 wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[dead]

The only reason businesses are tolerated is for the greater benefit. If a paint company is dumping waste in the river we get them to stop. They push back and say "if you stop you won't have paint" and we work out a tradeoff. Some businesses have hacked the system. For example finance is a service business but some people who just use it for self-enrichment have managed to persuade others that that is for the public g…

We see it now with fracking, if it only hurts the local population and benefits others, they are ignored. That’s not even to mention conflict minerals and the horrible working conditions in other countries.

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

#609

Post by kevviiinn »

codebreake wrote: post #563
kevviiinn wrote: post #508

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the long term success for cheating is actually much lower, those who actually learned things will do better in the long term even if they have a lower probability of short term success Many humans seem to be incredibly short sighted

I disagree, I don’t believe Trump and Elon musk are ethical and they are very successful in terms of power and money.

The success of those two are bad for the country long term, the idea that being super rich is success is also bad

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

#610

Post by somsak2 »

twic wrote: post #118
pavlov wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can’t really cheat your way to a better presentation. If the “spitballed” version is good enough for the situation, why expend a lot of effort on preparation? Maybe the problem is that people have low expectations when everyone delivers bad presentations. This kind of cultural thing is often easier to fix by changing the format rather than pushing for everyone to do more — in other words, ask “do we need all thes…

It probably isn't good enough. But it's hard for the audience to tell. "Any questions?" "How are we going to scale the data storage?" "Oh, we're confident that the data will all fit in a single SQLite instance." "Great." It's only six months later, when it turns out it won't, and there's a lot of stress and panicked re-working, that the lack of preparation will be obvious. And by then, everyone will have forgotten th…

If all you need to answer that question is "we're confident that X" then that's still a problem with the asker. Why are they confident? Have we modeled the data needs over time? What data are we even storing? Basic probing questions should either uncover the lack of preparation or show that things will indeed be fine.

Just like cheating is a problem for a teacher to solve, a lack of preparation is a problem for the audience to solve.

Post reply on HN