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

Canonical Under Attack

status.canonical.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 34 posts

Re: Canonical Under Attack

#21

Post by bitfilped »

dmoy wrote: post #4
cynicalsecurity wrote: post #3

I remember seeing Ubuntu hiring recently, like a half a year ago or a year ago. Their requirements was ridiculously outdated, like "we want maths geniuses with great marks, send us your marks or gtfo". Well, well, well, who would have thought "maths geniuses" are really bad at DDoS protection and running infra in real life. And academic marks / IT degree mean nothing in real IT work. Think twice next time you hire pe…

> Their requirements was ridiculously outdated, like "we want maths geniuses with great marks, send us your marks or gtfo". Man that like barely scratches the surface of the surrealness of canonical's hiring process

No to mention the absolutely absurd questions they ask. I looked at a sr position there and they were asking about performance in individual courses _in high school._ I haven't been in school for 20 years. I've learned and forgotten so many things since then, like I'm going to remember or care what I did in econ 101 multiple decades ago... It was so silly I didn't bother applying.

Re: Canonical Under Attack

#22

Post by bitfilped »

dd8601fn wrote: post #19
danbmil99 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can say that again. I went through a 50-75 hour process of interviews, leet-code exams (with tight pencil-down timing), culminating with a long-form project that they budgeted 4 hours for (took me 20+). I finally had a brain fart in the umpteenth interview and was not offered a job. Cray cray

I can’t help wonder what kind of people end up being hired in places like that. Geniuses like I’ve never even met? Weirdly hyper-specialized types? Ambitious con artists? Maybe friends of current employees get to skip the BS gauntlet?

The over ambitious and underperforming, might be a good indication of why they can't keep a website up :)

Re: Canonical Under Attack

#23

Post by olyjohn »

dd8601fn wrote: post #19
danbmil99 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can say that again. I went through a 50-75 hour process of interviews, leet-code exams (with tight pencil-down timing), culminating with a long-form project that they budgeted 4 hours for (took me 20+). I finally had a brain fart in the umpteenth interview and was not offered a job. Cray cray

I can’t help wonder what kind of people end up being hired in places like that. Geniuses like I’ve never even met? Weirdly hyper-specialized types? Ambitious con artists? Maybe friends of current employees get to skip the BS gauntlet?

These are the people who brought you the Snap package manager. The one nobody asked for. The one that constantly harasses you every half hour to close programs that you have open because there's always something with a goddamn update waiting. Then when you close it, it doesn't get updated, and you have no idea. Then you wait 30 seconds because every Snap app is slow as dog shit to launch. Then it tells you to close it because it needs an update.

Re: Canonical Under Attack

#24

Post by trashface »

danbmil99 wrote: post #16
dmoy wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Their requirements was ridiculously outdated, like "we want maths geniuses with great marks, send us your marks or gtfo". Man that like barely scratches the surface of the surrealness of canonical's hiring process

You can say that again. I went through a 50-75 hour process of interviews, leet-code exams (with tight pencil-down timing), culminating with a long-form project that they budgeted 4 hours for (took me 20+). I finally had a brain fart in the umpteenth interview and was not offered a job. Cray cray

Their hiring process apparently leaks through to the general design of ubuntu, which is trash.

Re: Canonical Under Attack

#25

Post by troad »

bitfilped wrote: post #21
dmoy wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Their requirements was ridiculously outdated, like "we want maths geniuses with great marks, send us your marks or gtfo". Man that like barely scratches the surface of the surrealness of canonical's hiring process

No to mention the absolutely absurd questions they ask. I looked at a sr position there and they were asking about performance in individual courses _in high school._ I haven't been in school for 20 years. I've learned and forgotten so many things since then, like I'm going to remember or care what I did in econ 101 multiple decades ago... It was so silly I didn't bother applying.

I've read some surreal recounts of the Canonical interview process. The CEO appears to have a fairly extreme fixation on candidates' high school experiences.

Needless to say, this is just absolutely bizarre. What kind of kid you were is a terrible proxy for professional competence or even present-day fit. (Not to mention that people's high school experiences are very likely to differ greatly based on things like socioeconomic status, race, sex, sexual orientation, disability, etc., and imposing a normative idea of what high school experiences ought to look like would probably unfairly discount candidates through no fault of their own.)

Post reply on HN