Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Triplebyte Engineer Genome Project

blog.triplebyte.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 40 posts

Re: Triplebyte Engineer Genome Project

#21

Post by Harj »

impish19 wrote: post #20

Whenever someone decides to hire someone, all of their criteria are heavily biased towards what kind of skills the candidates posses. I wonder if someone can come up with a reasonably accurate way to determine how well or easily can a candidate acquire particular skills. I realize this line of thought might not be popular for most startups who would want someone to get going as soon as they start. But if you're havin…

This is something we're able to do too by encouraging people to reapply and tracking how much they've improved between technical interviews. It makes sense for companies to do this too but they don't, mostly because it's never any single person's area of focus.

Re: Triplebyte Engineer Genome Project

#22

Post by makerman1982 »

Harj wrote: post #21
impish19 wrote: post #20

Whenever someone decides to hire someone, all of their criteria are heavily biased towards what kind of skills the candidates posses. I wonder if someone can come up with a reasonably accurate way to determine how well or easily can a candidate acquire particular skills. I realize this line of thought might not be popular for most startups who would want someone to get going as soon as they start. But if you're havin…

This is something we're able to do too by encouraging people to reapply and tracking how much they've improved between technical interviews. It makes sense for companies to do this too but they don't, mostly because it's never any single person's area of focus.

If people reapply wouldn't they know the interview already? Seems to me TB is obsessed with UDP and thinks it is 70% of what engineering is all about.

Re: Triplebyte Engineer Genome Project

#23

Post by ammon »

makerman1982 wrote: post #22
Harj wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is something we're able to do too by encouraging people to reapply and tracking how much they've improved between technical interviews. It makes sense for companies to do this too but they don't, mostly because it's never any single person's area of focus.

If people reapply wouldn't they know the interview already? Seems to me TB is obsessed with UDP and thinks it is 70% of what engineering is all about.

User Datagram Protocol? What gives you that impression? In any case, we run several versions of the interview, to allow people to reapply

Re: Triplebyte Engineer Genome Project

#25

Post by impish19 »

Harj wrote: post #21
impish19 wrote: post #20

Whenever someone decides to hire someone, all of their criteria are heavily biased towards what kind of skills the candidates posses. I wonder if someone can come up with a reasonably accurate way to determine how well or easily can a candidate acquire particular skills. I realize this line of thought might not be popular for most startups who would want someone to get going as soon as they start. But if you're havin…

This is something we're able to do too by encouraging people to reapply and tracking how much they've improved between technical interviews. It makes sense for companies to do this too but they don't, mostly because it's never any single person's area of focus.

Can you share more information about your findings here?

More specifically, has any company ever been content with the delta in experience/knowledge a candidate might have gained between interviews, enough to hire them? This as opposed to continuing to evaluate the candidate against an absolute benchmark.

Because if not, then this sort of evaluation doesn't really help, does it?

Re: Triplebyte Engineer Genome Project

#27

Post by asmdb »

ammon wrote: post #12
dineshp2 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assume the (very broad) criteria listed on the blog are supersets of very specific sub critera. Maybe if you could elaborate on what exactly those sub critera are, it would make things clear.

We have specific guidelines / process that we use to measure each. For example, professional coding is a focus on writing clean code, that is well designed on the micro level (good names, good modularity on the function / class level), and good testing. We measure this using a rubric as we watch each engineer code. Low-level understanding is knowledge of how computers work, under the hood (bits, bytes, character enco…

I recall part of the Triplebyte screening process was to implement a solution to a whiteboard-type problem under a time constraint. It occurred to me that not all companies would necessarily place heavy weight on solving whiteboard problems in the interview process, yet Triplebyte seemed to filter applicants right out of the gate based on this measurement. I am curious if the genome project will alter this aspect of the screening process?
Post reply on HN