11–20 of 183 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was interviewed by them. Best process ever. Easy, straightforward, had options but I wasn't really interested in working for other people anyway. They let me code in ClojureScript for the snake game if memory serves. Also, this was many years ago when they initially started out so I am assuming they only got better.
You made a snake game for an interview? Sounds fun :)
$50m in job offers last 6 months at $130,000 average salary, with 70% of job offers being accepted/signed = 267 people got hired in the past 180 days after completing roughly 30,000 interviews (based on the 5000/month quoted in the article). That means the chances of being hired after doing a TripleByte interview is slightly under 1% if my back of the napkin calculation is accurate.
Interviewing and evaluating engineers is an area a lot of people feel passionately about and have strong opinions on. We're continually looking for ways to improve our process, if you've any thoughts or feedback please ping me - harj at triplebyte.
$50m in job offers last 6 months at $130,000 average salary, with 70% of job offers being accepted/signed = 267 people got hired in the past 180 days after completing roughly 30,000 interviews (based on the 5000/month quoted in the article). That means the chances of being hired after doing a TripleByte interview is slightly under 1% if my back of the napkin calculation is accurate.
Only 267 people in 180 days? Sounds low. I guess it might not be based on the number of interviews as I am not sure how selective the hiring companies are being.
$50m in job offers last 6 months at $130,000 average salary, with 70% of job offers being accepted/signed = 267 people got hired in the past 180 days after completing roughly 30,000 interviews (based on the 5000/month quoted in the article). That means the chances of being hired after doing a TripleByte interview is slightly under 1% if my back of the napkin calculation is accurate.
What was always most interesting to us about starting a recruiting company was seeing what would happen if you treated hiring as a data problem. Partly we've raised more funding for the same reason any startup does, so we can grow faster to get more customers = more revenue = more success, etc. But we're also driven by how the larger the scale we operate at, the faster we can run experiments to answer questions about…
Anyone care to comment on how the whole Triplebyte process goes as a person who wants to be hired? I'm interested since I never got past the set of questions due to some kind of bug in the beta.
What does this mean exactly? E.g. does the test successfully identify the people who have the best portfolios of things they’ve built previously?
What was always most interesting to us about starting a recruiting company was seeing what would happen if you treated hiring as a data problem. Partly we've raised more funding for the same reason any startup does, so we can grow faster to get more customers = more revenue = more success, etc. But we're also driven by how the larger the scale we operate at, the faster we can run experiments to answer questions about…
What I was interested in is whether the questions get harder, if I answer well, but they seemed random.
You could use logistic regression to estimate the level of an interviewer and adjust the questions to get to the same accuracy with less time (or to improve accuracy with the same number of questions/time)