Everyone thinks they're hiring the top 1% (2005) • Hacker News Board

Re: Everyone thinks they're hiring the top 1% (2005)

#101

Post by jbae29 » Thu, Mar 03, 2011, 11:44 PM UTC

dpritchett wrote: post #90

jonnathanson wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The puzzle-givers were onto something, though. They were trying to test for intellectual agility and creative problem solving. There is some merit in asking these sorts of questions if you're interviewing younger kids for entry-level jobs. At that stage in the game, you're really just trying to find smart and hard-working people who can be trained. You're not overly concerned with years of experience, or crystallized…

Puzzles can be so easily misused. If the interviewer(s) all know the answer to the puzzle they'll have trouble being objective when it comes to measuring the responses of an interviewee who hasn't seen the puzzle before. Worse still is that an underinformed interviewer might simply tune out until the candidate returns an answer to the puzzle rather than actively participating in the candidate's problem-solving proces…

Maybe a good approach would be to give a puzzle that the interviewer doesn't know the answer to. That way, they work through the problem together and the interviewer can see what it's like to work with them.

I know this will never happen but it sounds kinda nice.

Re: Everyone thinks they're hiring the top 1% (2005)

#102

Post by robeastham » Thu, Mar 03, 2011, 11:57 PM UTC

edw519 wrote: post #40

In fact, one thing I have noticed is that the people who I consider to be good software developers barely ever apply for jobs at all. Good point. The best developers I ever hired were (a) already working, (b) not looking, (c) referred, and (d) without a current resume. Therefore, the people who I consider to be good software developers probably don't have a current resume. Therefore, the top 1% of good software devel…

I can't remember the last time I needed to update my resume, probably about a decade ago. I've managed to get pretty regular work as a contractor without one. I'm planning a career move perhaps into a permanent role and realised I haven't spent an awful lot of time networking with other developers or even digital agencies. I'm not suggesting I'm in the top 1% of devs but I'm sure there may be others in my situation who are in the top 1% and have just neglected their networking duties and worked somewhere in relative isolation. In these situations a good resume doesn't hurt your chances of getting where you want to be.

In fact when I realised I needed a new resume instead of just updating mine like I normal person I ended up writing an app called Mighty CV. Initially the service is aimed at developers and will hopefully make the task of creating and updating your resume easier.

Check it out - it has a LinkedIn importer and a dynamic PDF generator for when you need a paper copy. It'll show basic stats from HN and github too. I'm really keen to get some beta users from the HN crowd to test drive it so if you agree that the resume is not dead (at least for the other 99% of us) perhaps you'd like to sign up for the beta:

http://www.mightycv.com

Invites will be sent out in the next week or so.

Re: Everyone thinks they're hiring the top 1% (2005)

#103

Post by anonymoushn » Fri, Mar 04, 2011, 8:02 AM UTC

quizbiz wrote: post #87

krakensden wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

scholarships are pretty plentiful, if you're willing to do the application hustle.

If you are a member of a minority or have notable merit achievements.

I'm not sure why this would get downvoted. As a middle class white male in my major I was ineligible for a great many scholarships at my state university, and I was ineligible for most of the remaining ones because I had attended a concurrent high school and college program that did not publish class rank or inflate GPAs well beyond 4.0 as is common practice in normal high schools. As a result I could not get scholarships that required "(X on SAT or Y on ACT) and (Z GPA in high school or W percentile in high school) and *," in spite of my 800/710 SAT and 3.8+ GPA at the concurrent high school and college program.

Re: Everyone thinks they're hiring the top 1% (2005)

#104

Post by nostrademons » Fri, Mar 04, 2011, 10:33 AM UTC

rch wrote: post #71

danohuiginn wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is that they don't need to be networkers, because they will be networkees. i.e. other people will notice how good they are, and actively try to get them into appropriate jobs. I think this is largely true, though it takes a while for reputation to spread. There are some brilliant young developers who haven't yet been noticed by anybody in a position to hire them -- but they won't stay in that situation more…

Individual talent is still evident on developer mailing lists, discussion groups, etc. A quick example: http://9fans.net/archive/?q=rsc&go=Grep

Honestly...I don't think that search evidences talent at all. If I didn't already know who Russ Cox was (and seen his code in projects like Google CodeSearch, re2, and Go), I'd think him just another Internet idiot.

There is a big difference between watching someone code and watching them talk about coding. Ability in the latter is not indicative of ability in the former.

Re: Everyone thinks they're hiring the top 1% (2005)

#105

Post by gaius » Fri, Mar 04, 2011, 11:47 AM UTC

Tycho wrote: post #82

nailer wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For those wanting specifics: for a mid-level Python gig at a large investment bank, base of 80K GBP, bonus between 20 and 40K GBP, expecting base to rise accordingly over successive years. However expectation was 10 hour and 12 hour days, and work environment seemed, for want of a better term, hierarchically abusive. Furthermore, anyone who's seriously good is contracting, which should net you around 5-600GBP/day.

I suppose also consider rent in London is like 4x rent in other cities (or so I'm told).

It's expensive, but relative too. Last time I ran the numbers London was was more like 1.4x Paris, but it might be 4x somewhere in rural Wales...

Re: Everyone thinks they're hiring the top 1% (2005)

#106

Post by snippyhollow » Fri, Mar 04, 2011, 12:29 PM UTC

crocowhile wrote: post #28

snippyhollow wrote: post #13

All my friends that are really good "never went on the job market" and got hired following to their summer internship, and a few others (good ones) and I went forward to a Ph.D. This proves nothing, but brings some evidence.

Bad for them. Going onto the job market is not an opportunity only for those who hire but also for those who are looking for a job: if they are SO good, thew will have to chance to interview in many good places and pick the one they like the best. Settle down after a stage means taking the easy way. not a sign of excellence, if you ask me.

It totally depends on _where_ you settle down. They were and are all very happy with their jobs. They were all in their dream jobs! And one did startup->Google directly without being back on the job market.

Re: Everyone thinks they're hiring the top 1% (2005)

#107

Post by grammaton » Fri, Mar 04, 2011, 3:11 PM UTC

kefeizhou wrote: post #77

grammaton wrote: post #57

One assumption I never see questioned is the assumption that you actually need the top 1%. I would argue that in the vast majority of cases, you don't.

Top companies, especially in competitive industries like technology, need to constantly innovate and solve problems better and more efficiently than their competitors. And to do this they need those top 1% because problem solving skills and IQs are not completely stackable - the top 1% can solve problems that no teams of average developers can solve. Most companies need those top 1% if they want to keep up with the l…

But this runs right back into Joel's supposition. If only 1% of developers are capable of doing this well enough, then why do we still have a booming software industry?

Re: Everyone thinks they're hiring the top 1% (2005)

#108

Post by hallmark » Fri, Mar 04, 2011, 10:04 PM UTC

robeastham wrote: post #102

edw519 wrote: post #40

In fact, one thing I have noticed is that the people who I consider to be good software developers barely ever apply for jobs at all. Good point. The best developers I ever hired were (a) already working, (b) not looking, (c) referred, and (d) without a current resume. Therefore, the people who I consider to be good software developers probably don't have a current resume. Therefore, the top 1% of good software devel…

I can't remember the last time I needed to update my resume, probably about a decade ago. I've managed to get pretty regular work as a contractor without one. I'm planning a career move perhaps into a permanent role and realised I haven't spent an awful lot of time networking with other developers or even digital agencies. I'm not suggesting I'm in the top 1% of devs but I'm sure there may be others in my situation w…

Mighty CV looks good.

Would you be able to explain to me the meaning and calculation of "Top 99%" that is displayed next to the profile pic?

Re: Everyone thinks they're hiring the top 1% (2005)

#109

Post by salemh » Sun, Mar 06, 2011, 8:05 AM UTC

timmy_chen wrote: post #98

nailer wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find that people who are truly good actually love what they do. I don't know if I fit in that category, but I remember walking to work a few weeks ago thinking about one particular project: 'if I wasn't here I'd be doing this for free'. That said, I'm paid above average for the industry. The best combination of passion and reward I've ever seen has been small hedge funds and quant shops. They're smart, love what th…

how does a programmer find small hedge funds and quant shops? ive been thinking about a job hop.

http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&#3...

I'm not being caustic with the simple search, a few of those have excellent resources and discussions. You can also research the top recruiting firms in NYC / London who specialize only in Quant dev related roles. Top-3 financial firms require an Extremely high level of math, PHd. (for Senior roles), no job hopping, a target school (very rarely State schools), etc.

http://www.wilmott.com/messageview.cfm?catid=16&threadid...

(A kind of cruddy tone, but informative): http://news.efinancialcareers.co.uk/Guest_ITEM/newsItemId-26...

http://www.amazon.com/Heard-Street-Quantitative-Questions-In...

Edit: My own Boolean's recruiting for entry-level Quant Developers. Very specific criteria. CS Degree (no EE / Math programmers), Target schools, (but, "top" state schools allowed), NO Masters / PHD (an argument over too much specializing or saturation of education, meaning, the fund wanted to teach the hire).

They would relocate / sponsor from anywhere in the world. Only very specific schools from out of country (like India, the The Indian Institute of Technology was the only school to look at).

(BS OR BA OR “B.A.” OR “B.S.” OR Bachelor) AND (“computer science” OR “CS” OR “C.S”) AND SQL AND (java OR vb OR "c++") AND (logic OR algorithm OR multithread* OR concurren* OR "multi-thread") AND NOT (PHD OR “P.H.D.” OR “p.h.d”)

Re: Everyone thinks they're hiring the top 1% (2005)

#110

Post by salemh » Sun, Mar 06, 2011, 8:32 AM UTC

trustfundbaby wrote: post #99

This explains why recruiters become even more aggressive in trying to contact you when you actually have a job ... never understood that.

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1408813 "The unemployed will not be considered"