Live data from Hacker News

The Last Technical Interview

steve-yegge.medium.com

221–230 of 291 posts

Re: The Last Technical Interview

#221
post #13

The gold standard in hiring qualification is work-sample testing. It works fine. You do not need to "make hiring a profit center" or "provisionally hire" or do internships. Work samples done correctly demand less time from candidates than interviews and scale better than interviews. They are standardizable and iterable. What I feel like I'm reading here is someone who has been poisoned by FAANG hiring practices --- a…

Ime take-homes was a good way to purge all the good candidates with options from your pipeline as they would simply not turn anything in and go with someone else. Maybe with AI and so many layoffs it’s better now I haven’t tried in last couple of years though i doubt it

Take homes are much lower signal now with AI

Re: The Last Technical Interview

#222

Signals I've got from this post: - Steve's company got acquihired by Amazon, granting him a free ticket in without all the torment of the multi-stage interview pipeline. - It's a well known fact that it's easier to jump from one FAANG to another, so while interviewing at Google he had significant advantage, plus the blog gaining popularity. - All of this has caused a deep down imposter syndrome, which resulted in an…

He specifically mentioned that Geoworks got Acquired shortly after he was already at Amazon So, he actually did go through the multi-stage interview pipeline. Just because you can’t read well, you don’t have to be so cynical.

This is correct. GP hid a lot of unfounded and speculative negativity behind "this is a signal I'm getting". Not only did Yegge interview at Amazon, he also interviewed at Google and was very successful at senior levels of engineering leadership for the better part of a decade in both roles.

As for imposter syndrome: Yegge graduated from high school at 14 and studied nuclear reactor engineering with the US Navy in addition to his roles at prominent Silicon Valley companies. He is not my pick for somebody with imposter syndrome.

I am a fan of his because I've been reading his blog since the Stevie's Drunken Blog Rants days, and he was quite active in the Emacs community for some time. I also worked at Amazon and so his experience there became particularly interesting to me during that time.

Re: The Last Technical Interview

#223

I see this kind of “let’s make candidates work for free” proposal from time to time. It doesn’t work for software engineers because nobody wants to do free work. Also, free work isn’t consistently, and fairly testable because project requirements can evolve or completely change over a hiring period. Not to mention IP issues. What has worked in my experience is a synthetic take home exercise that isn’t easily LLM solv…

It also means you'll have to onboard a lot of new employees all the time. That sounds exhausting.

Re: The Last Technical Interview

#224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ime take-homes was a good way to purge all the good candidates with options from your pipeline as they would simply not turn anything in and go with someone else. Maybe with AI and so many layoffs it’s better now I haven’t tried in last couple of years though i doubt it

Take homes are much lower signal now with AI

Depends on what you ask, i suppose. I’m sure i can come up with something that can’t simply be one shot or the result would be bad if you do. A bit more difficult on logistics tho as you’d have to arrange for an environment with some prepaid llm access

Re: The Last Technical Interview

#225

I see this kind of “let’s make candidates work for free” proposal from time to time. It doesn’t work for software engineers because nobody wants to do free work. Also, free work isn’t consistently, and fairly testable because project requirements can evolve or completely change over a hiring period. Not to mention IP issues. What has worked in my experience is a synthetic take home exercise that isn’t easily LLM solv…

The drawback of this approach is that candidates will judge the work they will do based on the exercise. I’ve gotten these exercises before and just noped out, determining from it alone that this isn’t going to be a place I want to work at. Or maybe that’s a good thing? As long as the exercise is representative of the work the candidate will be doing, it gives them a chance to decide early if it won’t work out.

I received one of these when I applied at twitter (pre-musk) and it was so poorly worded and organized that it went badly for me and the interviewer. But I see that as dodging a bullet (google was a much better fit for me).

Re: The Last Technical Interview

#226
here's the uncomfortable truth. most software engineers are good enough to hire.

i've seen a few interview types in my time:

1. technical interviews run by nontechnical or junior engineers who can't judge technical talent. this typically produces sub-par hires. imagine you are made the director of UX design and you have to hire someone but know little about the industry. what type of hires are you going to get?

2. technical interviews that focus on CS skills. can you write a red-black tree in Java? can you write a bubble sort in haskell? The problems here is that this has bias towards new CS grads that dont have much industry experience but just took tests on stuff like this in their degree. google pioneered this style of interview and it's taken off as leetcode. the problem is that experienced devs dont typically write bubblesort algorithms. this type of interview is biased toward younger out of college hires and codecamp hires that have little experience but gring on leetcode sites.

3. technical interviews that have too many opinions for a hire recommendation. this seems to be a new trend where you need 3 or 5 or 7 thumbs up to get hired and any negatives sink the candidate. this does raise the bar, but typically what i see is someone on this panel has a high opinion of his/her abilities and gives everyone they seem a thumbs down.

What i've found is that soft skills and team dynamics are > the technical accumen. I can teach you how to write go(lang) but its much harder to teach you how to influence your peers or to communicate effectively.

Experienced devs probably dont know how to ace your leetcode interview, but they do know how to influence and communicate and when to stay away from bad ideas. You dont get tested on these things. It's analogous to a being combat veteran. You've been there, you've done that you know how to survive. You might not know the new tech, but that can be taught. I have never seen an dev not be able to pickup a new platform/language/skill within 6 months of hire - anywhere.

Here's hoping this will get better one day but i'm not holding by breath.

Re: The Last Technical Interview

#227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the article: > In the U.S. you generally can’t just up and fire someone, even if they are underperforming, even if it’s at-will employment, without risking a lawsuit and some sort of cash outlay. This is what makes hiring decisions so high-stakes. I've been part of a few situations where someone had to be let go in the USA, and I can tell you it wasn't a trivial decision. There were legal aspects, sure, but ther…

in most states, as long as it's not discriminatory, you CAN fire anyone for any reason the article is wrong here

I guess that's the rub. every time I've been involved in firing someone that wasn't defensible as a 'broad structural layoff', there is a whole process, even in at will states. HR starts to collect documentation describing how the employees performance isn't acceptable, at that they were warned on such and such dates, and that all efforts were made in order to rectify the situation before an actual termination.

whether that's an excess of legal paranoia or not, that's how it seems to work

Re: The Last Technical Interview

#228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the article: > In the U.S. you generally can’t just up and fire someone, even if they are underperforming, even if it’s at-will employment, without risking a lawsuit and some sort of cash outlay. This is what makes hiring decisions so high-stakes. I've been part of a few situations where someone had to be let go in the USA, and I can tell you it wasn't a trivial decision. There were legal aspects, sure, but ther…

in most states, as long as it's not discriminatory, you CAN fire anyone for any reason the article is wrong here

> … for any reason.

If they give a reason, it had better be a legal reason. “Because you’re Mexican” - not legal. “Because we don’t like you/you don’t fit in” - are you in any way different than management? Differently gendered? Differently skin toned? Different faith? Pregnant? Likely not legal.

They are not required to give a reason. You can be fired without reason.

There’s also mitigating circumstances. If the employee can show retaliation by the employer (say the employee participates in protected activities, like espousing unionization or questioning managerial decisions), they stand a chance of recovering damages from the company.

Re: The Last Technical Interview

#229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the article: > In the U.S. you generally can’t just up and fire someone, even if they are underperforming, even if it’s at-will employment, without risking a lawsuit and some sort of cash outlay. This is what makes hiring decisions so high-stakes. I've been part of a few situations where someone had to be let go in the USA, and I can tell you it wasn't a trivial decision. There were legal aspects, sure, but ther…

in most states, as long as it's not discriminatory, you CAN fire anyone for any reason the article is wrong here

In practice, at any larger corporation with an HR department, despite the law saying so, you can absolutely not fire anyone for any reason. As a manager you’ll have to go through a 1+ month process of documented coaching, performance improvement plan, etc to gather evidence in case the employee sues after being let go. So not sure if Steve is technically correct here, but he is very much practically correct. It’s been like this in big tech, which is what Steve is talking about, for a long time.

Re: The Last Technical Interview

#230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

in most states, as long as it's not discriminatory, you CAN fire anyone for any reason the article is wrong here

I guess that's the rub. every time I've been involved in firing someone that wasn't defensible as a 'broad structural layoff', there is a whole process, even in at will states. HR starts to collect documentation describing how the employees performance isn't acceptable, at that they were warned on such and such dates, and that all efforts were made in order to rectify the situation before an actual termination. wheth…

> HR starts to collect documentation describing how the employees performance isn't acceptable, at that they were warned on such and such dates, and that all efforts were made in order to rectify the situation before an actual termination.

I think this is a response to inexperienced, immature, or thin-skinned managers. The company doesn’t want to be on the hook for some manager’s attempt to fire someone and have it be an illegal firing. Since there’s typically no day-to-day log of behavior, HR has to begin documenting things. The only thing they can be certain is “safe” for the company is to fire for underperforming. So let’s begin the paper trail…

Post reply on HN