Live data from Hacker News

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

teamblind.com

731–740 of 748 posts

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

#731
post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is spitballing a presentation cheating? It's the equivalent of taking a test without studying, not presenting somebody else's work as your own.

It's a broken system where effort and performance isn't acknowledged and rewarded and the whole purpose of being there is undermined. At some point the whole enterprise is destructive and should be shut down.

>It's a broken system where effort and performance isn't acknowledged and rewarded and the whole purpose of being there is undermined. At some point the whole enterprise is destructive and should be shut down.

The point of presentation is usably not to put up great presentation, but to get certain points across.

If you successfully do that with quickly thrown presentation, then its waste of time spending more on it.

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

#732
post #659

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This. My other favorite is very open-ended questions. I mostly do ops-y interviews, and my favorite question is "what happens when you type 'curl https://google.com ' in a terminal and hit enter?" The question is so broad there isn't a "correct" answer to Google, and it crosses enough domains that any article they find is going to be too long to skim. Then I ask them to really zero in on some aspect of it they feel c…

That's what I do (instead of curl, with a browser). MANY super cool convos spun out of this question (interviewed around 60 people). One of them never actually got to the network request part bc we went DEEP into event handlers in a GUI etc. Another candidate was all over the place with key exchange protocols and what and how can go wrong. I usually don't ask further questions to "corner" them, let them go into any o…

This is the most common question for screening non-ICs like EM, TPM at Amazon.

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

#733

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Either you live in some bubble or you're just lying lol.

Well, we all live in bubbles, don't we? That's why it's interesting to have a glimpse into other people's bubbles, and be reminded that our own experiences are often not representative of the whole.

Ya true, just some bubbles are smaller than others.

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

#734

I grew up staunchly against cheating. Becoming an adult was hard. My whole university class cheated on a tough assignment - someone found the solution online and shared it around. I didn't look at it, took the challenge and gave it a lot of effort. I got a pretty bad mark and the rest of the class got top marks. I also see the same mindset in work. People don't prepare for presentations and then spitball when present…

Cheating is a slippery slope.

This is the one thing that I always remind myself and my people, whenever the temptation arises.

If my cheating works, I could never stop myself from doing it again, bigger, causing much worse damage to me and people around me when I get caught.

If my cheating fails, I've lost more than what I could have gained anyway.

To me its a lose-lose. I'd rather get up and leave, or find another way than cheat.

And I hold that standard for people around me too. If I know they've cheated, even when I'm not involved or affected, that person or group and I are done.

Its a hard non-negotiable thing. And I think I'm better for it.

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

#735

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? You'll have access to google when you're working so I would assume you're allowed to google stuff during the interview.

Because people administering tests always have weird or arbitrary assumptions and restrictions. Part of getting through school is jumping through all the contrived hoops they place before you, even when it'd be much easier to just walk around the hoops. Job interviews are no different; different interviewers have different expectations, and many don't want you consulting outside information sources.

[dead]

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

#736

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…

This is why I left the tech industry. Nothing but losers with no skills getting hired. No sympathy for anyone fired

No sympathy for someone losing their livelihood, because they're "too weak"? That's pretty dark.

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

#737

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

One thing I've noticed is that many Americans have a blind spot here. You can get away with a lot of corruption and dishonest behaviour if you're the right kind of American because admitting it would be to question the idea of honesty here. That's usually why the first port of call when some corruption is detected is Finding What's Weird and the second is Not Like The Rest Of Us. San Francisco's city government is ho…

All successful systems sow the seeds of their own destruction.

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

#738

One person's cheating-in-an-interview is another person's giving-the-gatekeeper-the-answer-they-want. Your manager wants you to have a second laptop open when they ask you for information. The goal of interviews is to determine if the candidate has useful skills. Integrity is determined by a background check and the bar is typically low and subject to removal for-the-right-candidate. In the end, people fetishizing in…

TL;DR : Cheaters like others who cheat, don't beat yourself up if you aren't accepted.

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

#739
post #448

In my long computer career, I've only had a couple of times where someone got ahead of me by lying or misrepresenting their skills. When working with such people, it's pretty obvious to most that they don't know what they're doing. While I have also been a very helpful person, I have a rule: I refuse to help someone who has misrepresented their skills. This type of person has no problem lying to get ahead then expect…

I agree with you, and I believe in the same. People that help cheaters don't realize that these people put up a sweet face and good behavior just so they can stab you in the back and take all that they can because they view you as a sucker. Helping them doesn't benefit anyone.

Heck, I'd even go as far as to say that large corporations that generate a lot of money depend on just a few individuals of extraordinary merit who are (by naivete or (social) design) incentivized to spread the attribution of work done. This sort of distribution is never equal by design; if the genius (proper definition https://geniusfamine.blogspot.com/) is a 100x-er then there'll be a thousand leeches vying for bragging rights to the work that they aren't responsible for. This is often called "prestige", and is something the west inherited from the third world, where people routinely make shit up and even though everyone knows in their bones that it's made up, they play along. In time, people get too stupid to even know that. If you can induce "prestige" in random people, that's brand loyalty. Someone that can do all of this, capture a bright sucker and put a thousand leeches on him is called a really great ""innovator"", like Steve Jobs and Bill Gates, and who knows how many more. These guys never did much, were handed things on a silver platter and managed to be the luckiest (not in the ironic / "hardwork" manner) guys. Modern large-scale society rewards these people handily because all the extortion and gaslighting of the competent is abstracted away into the "public good" and "shareholder and company value". I don't believe everyone gets a leech or two, because not everyone is able to contribute. Most people can't read above a fifth grade level. Heck, most of finance is based around the upper management servicing their friends at the expense of everyone else. Everything is downstream of that, and most white-collar work is now a scramble just to determine where the most competent people work, and exploiting them (this is done not just the people at the top, but also by their "fellow colleagues"!).

Family is supposed to be exempt from these things. Societies that consider this a given often flourish into first world economies, and remain so as long as they keep the real leeches at bay. Societies that don't never rise from the muck.

It's in the leech's interest to help out others like him.

This also explains the absolute seethe that libertarian viewpoints generate. Reading someone like Ayn Rand actually scares these people because she advocates for people to stop being taken advantage of when there's nothing in it for them. Same for a lot of authors like Rothbard and Mises, they're all "overturned" on their idealism but all the critique of the daylight robbery is quietly squashed (aka never addressed) by the opposition.

Imagine being called a "sucker" by the leeches. Gaslighting at its finest.

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

#740

I'll make the obvious point that these interviews were not good predictors of success at the companies. In general, I've found in 15 years of interviews that interviews are not highly correlated with the work at any given company. I wish we would move beyond cargo cult interview styles and base interviews (and screening, for that matter) on the actual work and culture of each company.

I ran a largish statistical analysis where I was working on all interviews and employee ratings for the following year (16000 data points). My conclusion was that: * some interview problems carried zero signal * some interviewers are really good at identifying strong candidates, and others correlate negatively! On average interviewers rating is a weak signal ( * geographic location is a medium signal (0.2) * a releva…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN