This isn't a good article, but it's not off-topic, and flags aren't downvotes. I vouched it.
Google doesn't hire losers
11–20 of 22 posts
Re: Google doesn't hire losers
#12This isn't a good article, but it's not off-topic, and flags aren't downvotes. I vouched it.
I flag when the article isn't of a quality worth discussing. This certainly meets that criteria.
Re: Google doesn't hire losers
#13Maybe not, but they seem to hire lots of arrogant jerks.
Re: Google doesn't hire losers
#14This isn't a good article, but it's not off-topic, and flags aren't downvotes. I vouched it.
Its perfectly fine to flag garbage ontopic articles.
Re: Google doesn't hire losers
#15Good thoughts here but the writing could really be refined to clarify what the author is trying to convey. I'm also a person with a somewhat unusual pedigree and have those feelings of being condescended to by people who came in on the Stanford -> Big-Name Tech conveyor belt.
Re: Google doesn't hire losers
#16I know plenty of losers that were hired by Google, Amazon, Facebook, Netflix, etc.
I don't actually know of one golden company that has never hired a dud.
Not one.
Re: Google doesn't hire losers
#17False, they hired me. There is a huge element of randomness in google's hiring process. So much of it depends on whether you and your interviewers were having a bad day that day. I suppose being hired there means you're above some minimum bar of competence, but I don't think being rejected means anything other than you got unlucky.
It's important to realize this post doesn't make any assertions about the fundamental merits of people who are rejected by Google.
Re: Google doesn't hire losers
#18This article adds no signal to my world view except that there is an employee at google who thinks its professional to 'fail the fuck' out of me.