Live data from Hacker News

People suck at technical interviews

seldo.com

111–120 of 177 posts

Re: People suck at technical interviews

#111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some one more seasoned would not work for free at a weekend.

Some one more seasoned would not work for free during a weekday. See, I can play that game too. Besides, this was a contrived problem. If you want to say "I refuse to solve any coding problems while interviewing for a software position", then fair enough. Good luck finding one. I think this was a total of perhaps 3 hours of my time, and was good enough to get an onsite? And it was time I -enjoyed-. Unlike most phone…

I think the grandparent is reacting to "Untimed. They gave me a weekend" which made it sound as if the interview took all weekend which a more seasoned programmer would be less likely to do.

Re: People suck at technical interviews

#112
All of these exact same points (including a very similar title) have been floating around my head as an idea for an article I wanted to write. I was so pleased to find that you had basically written my article for me. Very well said on all accounts :D

Re: People suck at technical interviews

#113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Homework is great, but only if a job offer is guaranteed if submitting a sufficient project. It is hubris to think someone will care enough about your company to spend 8 hours of their time for the small chance to be hired. Presumably you are giving the same assignment to a handful of other candidates. You are simply outsourcing much of the investment of hiring to the candidates. This is simply unethical (one of many…

It's not a small chance at all -- and it only comes after a conversation where I have done basic vetting and where I have explained why the problems that we're solving are exciting to me. (That is, if you're not ginned up to do the homework, I haven't done my job -- or it's not a fit.) And as an aside, your test for ethics is entirely asinine, as it renders anything of sub-infinite scale unethical. (Among its more ob…

Of course small is subjective, but I would consider, say, a 1 in 3 chance to be small in this case.

>test for ethics is entirely asinine, as it renders anything of sub-infinite scale unethical

I don't see how this is so. Explain?

>anyone who chooses not to have children is behaving unethically -- as is anyone who has children, for that matter

This is also not obvious. Of course tenable is poorly defined, but there is nothing contradictory/chaotic/unsustainable about everyone stopping having kids. Furthermore, it is not obvious to me that the statement "it is unethical to not have kids (if you're able)" is necessarily absurd.

Re: People suck at technical interviews

#114
post #107
post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Testing 4=='4' is far from pointless. For better or worse, programming as the majority of us practice it is no longer about flipping bits or moving bytes or red-black trees or building common collections data structures. It's now about a language plus an api or apis, and the language of front end web development is javascript. So checking if front end or fullstack dev candidates have a basic understanding of types in…

One can learn facts. In fact, it is incredibly trivial to do so if you are smart. I need to do it dozens of times a day to do my job, as does any programmer. I don't program javascript at all, but am vaguely aware of the terrible implicit conversions it does. Isn't that the important part? I do not have memorized that false == 'false' // false, yet false == '0' // true Why would I (I had to google that, took 5 second…

Um, no. If you don't understand types in js, you don't understand js. I'm not hiring a front-end engineer who somehow hasn't learn js unless he or she is a totally raw intern. And a 1st or 2nd year intern, not a 4th. For anyone else, you need to know js, and if you don't understand types, you don't know js. If you need to google your example, you simply can't write js on a daily basis. (The one exception is, as noted below, saying "don't do that, here's why, do this instead"; that's a great answer.)

Types, functions, objects, classes, type conversions, etc, are part of the minimal working set needed to write code in a language.

Re: People suck at technical interviews

#115
post #60

I've interviewed with dozens and dozens of startups in NYC. I'm an entry level Front-End Dev with passion for a lot of things I (in hindsight) probably should have gone to college for. For example, my current side-project is a completely client-side image metadata reader/writer that has forced me to learn new things like parsing Binary, Endianness, Meta and a lot of things about organizing JS because I've never built…

Not one company has invited you to come onsite for a day-long interview to code alongside the team? You should be upfront with the employer. "I think the best way for me to showcase my skills would be to come onsite for a day, and tackle whatever projects you're working on currently. After 8 hours, you'll have a good assessment as to whether or not it's a fit, and vice-versa."

Not one company has asked me to write code on a computer.

Also important to note these are almost all fully funded companies with solid dev teams. I've had great offers that just never worked out due to fit (or rather lack of passion from the dev teams).

I've thrown the offer out there on several occasions but it's always refused or delayed to the point where contact drops. One time the senior engineer told me my offer to come in and code on my own dime was "nonsense" and If I knew better I wouldnt be offering my work for free, because that would hurt the "startup economy".

My faith in the NY Tech Scene is pretty much non-existent to the point I'd rather make hourly wage in manual labor and hack on projects in my own time, as opposed to burning myself out around people like noted above.

--edit-- Which is exactly what I do

Re: People suck at technical interviews

#116
post #83
post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Testing 4=='4' is far from pointless. For better or worse, programming as the majority of us practice it is no longer about flipping bits or moving bytes or red-black trees or building common collections data structures. It's now about a language plus an api or apis, and the language of front end web development is javascript. So checking if front end or fullstack dev candidates have a basic understanding of types in…

Well, testing 4 == '4' is pointless in my opinion, because you should never use the '=='-type equality in JavaScript. I never use it, so I don't even know what that evaluates to. You should always use ===, and set up a linter to enforce that. What I think is valuable to understand is the concept of truthy and falsy, as I've seen even some experienced JavaScript programmers struggle with that. Maybe that could be a de…

[deleted]

Re: People suck at technical interviews

#117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In no other common situation does a tech worker find themselves interrogated by a panel of strangers whose implicit goal is to knock them out of contention. I take the opposite approach. I want you to succeed. I want you to be the best candidate I've seen so far. I want you to be awesome. In fact, I want to hire you right now and never have to do another interview again. I'm in your corner, and I'm rooting for you…

If rejection wasn't such a powerfully negative psychological force, if loss aversion wasn't such a fundamental part of our psyche, we'd all be successful startup CEOs, because sales would be no problem. But in reality, very few of us have the stomach for sales.

This is why it saddens me that the majority of the advice given in places like /r/cscareerquestions boils down to, "Get good at sales"

Re: People suck at technical interviews

#118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You aren't interviewing people to determine how good they are at interviewing, because interviewing doesn't generate money for your company. Depends. At most companies, how you handle a simple interview is still relevant if it's for a revenue generating or client facing role (e.g., sales, marketing, and project management). Granted, most technical roles aren't generating revenue or in contact with clients, so this…

I've often wondered whether for technical roles involving little or no client interaction[1], negatively-weighting skill at answering very pat interview questions (like where they want to be in five years, what they liked most about their degree course or why they're passionate about writing server side code for an ad platform) relative to their overall performance might actually be a useful, if very counter-intuitiv…

I think that falling into the trap of treating social skills and technical ability as a trade-off is a mistake. It's a hackneyed stereotype that I don't think has ever been true--but I'd imagine it has sometimes led to people expressly trying to seem socially abnormal in order to fit the idea of someone technically adept. I recall an anecdote about how a younger mathematician at a top research institution took up running his hand along the wall as he went places in order to seem odder, since it seemed like the best senior mathematicians there all had odd quirks. I'd imagine that the idea that social skills and technical ability are inversely correlated has led to similar things.

But also, my experience in TAing the weed out course for the CS major (and from seeing my fellow TAs teach and work, who were more or less the best in class at my University--so much so that I was flown out by a company simply because of my involvement in that class) was that social skills had absolutely no correlation to technical ability: your ability to understand how pointers or complex data structures worked had absolutely no relation to how socially fluent you were. In fact, it often went the opposite way, up to a point: there was some base line of social fluency that everyone I worked with and the best people I taught seemed to meet. The single best coder I have /ever/ seen work (he alone makes me absolutely certain that the best people in our industry are 10x/100x more productive than the average) was also one of the most comfortable with people and had a very clear idea of his career goals. I'd expect him to give confident, unhesitating responses to "Where do you see yourself in 5 years?" and "What's your greatest strength/weakness?" Negatively weighting that would mean you'd miss the hands down most productive person I've ever seen work: and you'd probably miss a decent number of the other people I taught with. (Who, as I said, were basically the cream of the crop from the program I was in. Not all of the best people were there, but all of the people there were among the best.)

Now, I don't think they're particularly good interview questions, even though I understand why they're asked. I think that asking questions about actual workplace soft skills (conflict resolution, for instance) would be a much better use of everyone's time, since in the end it's those things that actually hold a team together.

Re: People suck at technical interviews

#119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Homework is great, but only if a job offer is guaranteed if submitting a sufficient project. It is hubris to think someone will care enough about your company to spend 8 hours of their time for the small chance to be hired. Presumably you are giving the same assignment to a handful of other candidates. You are simply outsourcing much of the investment of hiring to the candidates. This is simply unethical (one of many…

It's not a small chance at all -- and it only comes after a conversation where I have done basic vetting and where I have explained why the problems that we're solving are exciting to me. (That is, if you're not ginned up to do the homework, I haven't done my job -- or it's not a fit.) And as an aside, your test for ethics is entirely asinine, as it renders anything of sub-infinite scale unethical. (Among its more ob…

> And as an aside, your test for ethics is entirely asinine, as it renders anything of sub-infinite scale unethical.

That's not his test, that's Kant's Categorical Imperative :)

Re: People suck at technical interviews

#120
post #73

Having just had a 3h long technical interview for Google Deepmind, I cannot agree more with a lot of points raised in this post. Deepmind being a machine learning/statistics/maths/computer science fuelled company, it made sense for the interview process to follow this simple organisation. I was however very disappointed by the questions asked for each part. Not a single one of the ~100 questions asked during these 3h…

Do you think mathematicians start over from learning how to count everytime they encounter a new problem? That's different from looking up the 10th digit of pi: that's encyclopedic.

Knowing what a classifier is is simply more than encyclopedic knowledge that you should probably know before joining an AI company.

Post reply on HN