Rethinking Triplebyte • Hacker News Board

Re: Rethinking Triplebyte

#11

Post by edgyquant » Thu, Jun 17, 2021, 5:50 PM UTC

I'm an engineer who was introduced to a startup via triplebyte. I liked the platform because I went through a technical interview to even be allowed to connect with companies (one that a lot of my peers who are junior level weren't able to pass.) I guess my first thought is that doesn't this defeat the initial purpose of Triplebyte?

If you allow everyone in, regardless of if they are qualified to be a senior level engineer, will this not just be another job hunt platform where (when I look for another job) I'd still have to do another technical interview at the company itself?

How will companies know now who has been vetted as qualified and who is just lying on their resume? Maybe it's shitty to think this way but there is already a ton of sites out there that allow me to send my resume (or allow a company to view mine) before starting a traditional hiring process that Triplebyte prevented, allowing companies to connect with qualified high level engineers and know the person would fit their skill needs. The way it was companies mainly were just testing for cultural fits, etc.

Re: Rethinking Triplebyte

#12

Post by crooked-v » Thu, Jun 17, 2021, 5:53 PM UTC

wayoutthere wrote: post #8

In 2021, you don’t even have to search for engineering jobs. You either start out with a shortlist of companies and roles or a recruiter reaches out to you and kicks off the process. Maybe this would be useful for folks just starting their career, but on the hiring side of this, in the last year I haven’t made an offer to a candidate who didn’t already have at least one other offer on the table. Overall I think there…

While the constant supply of recruiter contacts and even direct internal company contacts I get is nice, I repeatedly see the sort of basic issues as mentioned in the piece of concealment of or lying about pay (or incredibly broad pay ranges), entirely leaving out information about a job's location even when it's on the other side of the country, trying to offer entirely inappropriate junior positions that I'm never going to be interested in... all stuff that has zero cost to a hiring manager but wastes my time. I could see a lot of usefulness in something to push back against that in a structured way.

Re: Rethinking Triplebyte

#13

Post by dsr_ » Thu, Jun 17, 2021, 5:53 PM UTC

edgyquant wrote: post #11

I'm an engineer who was introduced to a startup via triplebyte. I liked the platform because I went through a technical interview to even be allowed to connect with companies (one that a lot of my peers who are junior level weren't able to pass.) I guess my first thought is that doesn't this defeat the initial purpose of Triplebyte? If you allow everyone in, regardless of if they are qualified to be a senior level en…

When you're coming close to market saturation, you can't maintain unicorn-style growth rates.

TripleByte wants that growth rate more than anything else: therefore, this.

Re: Rethinking Triplebyte

#14

Post by Leoeer » Thu, Jun 17, 2021, 5:53 PM UTC

So, I'm personally pretty unhappy with this change, because part of what made triplebyte valuable (and gave y'all the hundreds-of-thousands-engineer userbase) was the _path to competence-signalling_ which avoided credentials that your platform gave, given the quiz -- companies knew that someone being on triplebyte was a strong signal, and engineers had a path to signalling competence that was one-to-many. Eliminating that signal for goals that...seemingly don't require it (why does this new job platform require eliminating the assessment?) seems unwise, IMO

Re: Rethinking Triplebyte

#15

Post by ammon » Thu, Jun 17, 2021, 5:55 PM UTC

acarl005 wrote: post #10

I got my job through TripleByte. I consider it my dream job. Honestly, I loved the experience with TripleByte. I got a bunch of interviews to happen at the same time. Having them all together increases our bargaining power. It's hard to get the processes with different companies to coincide if you're just waiting around for recruiters to reach out. I already felt like it gave me the power. I'm sad to hear it's changi…

I'm really glad that the old process worked so well for you. When it worked, it was pretty great. We are losing something with this pivot. The problem is that the old process did not work for far more people than it did. For every wonderful experience with a TM there were 10+ engineers who we screened out. That’s why we made this change.

Re: Rethinking Triplebyte

#16

Post by jawns » Thu, Jun 17, 2021, 5:55 PM UTC

edgyquant wrote: post #11

I'm an engineer who was introduced to a startup via triplebyte. I liked the platform because I went through a technical interview to even be allowed to connect with companies (one that a lot of my peers who are junior level weren't able to pass.) I guess my first thought is that doesn't this defeat the initial purpose of Triplebyte? If you allow everyone in, regardless of if they are qualified to be a senior level en…

Exclusivity and rapid growth don't normally go hand-in-hand, so one would expect that at some point, the company would have to bend on one of them, and it makes sense that they decided to bend on exclusivity. Facebook followed a similar course early in its history, and what allowed it to rapidly grow was diversifying its value prop. When it was exclusive to Ivy Leaguers, the draw was the meet other people at your school. When it was exclusive to college students, the draw was to meet other people at your school. But then when it became open to the world, it became much more of a general-purpose social networking site. That's the course Triplebyte will likely need to navigate if it wants to be successful in the long run.

Re: Rethinking Triplebyte

#17

Post by crooked-v » Thu, Jun 17, 2021, 5:57 PM UTC

edgyquant wrote: post #11

I'm an engineer who was introduced to a startup via triplebyte. I liked the platform because I went through a technical interview to even be allowed to connect with companies (one that a lot of my peers who are junior level weren't able to pass.) I guess my first thought is that doesn't this defeat the initial purpose of Triplebyte? If you allow everyone in, regardless of if they are qualified to be a senior level en…

I'll broadly second this. As an experienced dev, what kept Triplebyte on my radar was being able to at least theoretically cut past the initial round of 'can you actually fizzbuzz or are you just lying about it' that most companies need to filter out the people with inexplicably good resumes but no practical skills.

Re: Rethinking Triplebyte

#18

Post by hprotagonist » Thu, Jun 17, 2021, 5:58 PM UTC

ammon wrote: post #15

acarl005 wrote: post #10

I got my job through TripleByte. I consider it my dream job. Honestly, I loved the experience with TripleByte. I got a bunch of interviews to happen at the same time. Having them all together increases our bargaining power. It's hard to get the processes with different companies to coincide if you're just waiting around for recruiters to reach out. I already felt like it gave me the power. I'm sad to hear it's changi…

I'm really glad that the old process worked so well for you. When it worked, it was pretty great. We are losing something with this pivot. The problem is that the old process did not work for far more people than it did. For every wonderful experience with a TM there were 10+ engineers who we screened out. That’s why we made this change.

> For every wonderful experience with a TM there were 10+ engineers who we screened out.

maybe (and i know that this is an outré thing to say these days) that was the point.

Re: Rethinking Triplebyte

#19

Post by ammon » Thu, Jun 17, 2021, 5:58 PM UTC

Leoeer wrote: post #14

So, I'm personally pretty unhappy with this change, because part of what made triplebyte valuable (and gave y'all the hundreds-of-thousands-engineer userbase) was the _path to competence-signalling_ which avoided credentials that your platform gave, given the quiz -- companies knew that someone being on triplebyte was a strong signal, and engineers had a path to signalling competence that was one-to-many. Eliminating…

So, we ARE keeping the quiz (and companies still trust it as much as they did in the past). It's just not mandatory.

Re: Rethinking Triplebyte

#20

Post by maverick2007 » Thu, Jun 17, 2021, 5:59 PM UTC

Leoeer wrote: post #14

So, I'm personally pretty unhappy with this change, because part of what made triplebyte valuable (and gave y'all the hundreds-of-thousands-engineer userbase) was the _path to competence-signalling_ which avoided credentials that your platform gave, given the quiz -- companies knew that someone being on triplebyte was a strong signal, and engineers had a path to signalling competence that was one-to-many. Eliminating…

I feel the exact same way. I went through the interview process with a handful of good startups through Triplebyte (and got offers from almost all of them) and even though I ended up taking a job with a company outside of TB, I still walked away extremely impressed and confident that I'd use the platform again in my next search. I loved that I was pre-qualified and didn't have to intensely prove my technical chops at every on site. With this change, I don't see the benefits for me to use TB over a competing job board or just applying to companies directly. With these changes, I don't plan on using TB for my next job search.

Edit: just saw the comment that TB is keeping the quiz. Would consider using the platform in the future as long as that pre-qualification track is available and that this new direction is just a superset on the existing TB features.