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

Flunking my Anthropic interview again

taylor.town

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 374 posts

Re: Flunking my Anthropic interview again

#241

Post by lilerjee »

Too much emphasis on this position and this company.

> I posted diggit.dev to HackerNews and it hit the frontpage!

Again, too much emphasis on HackerNews and the position of a post

What do you want from them? Are you confused or distracted by all this?

This isn't a big deal, just a small thing. Be stronger.

Focus on what will bring long-term peace and benefit. Experience every process and enjoy everything, rather than frustration, self-blame, pain, or other negative emotions. It's always better to find solutions and enjoy the present moment.

I don't want to teach or instruct anyone, just a little of my thoughts. If you feel offended, sorry for that.

Re: Flunking my Anthropic interview again

#242

Post by stavros »

jp57 wrote: post #68

One great piece of advice an informal mentor gave me long ago is that there is no information in a rejection . That is to say that you cannot draw any conclusions about yourself or your interviewing technique or your skills or anything from the single accept==0 bit that you typically get back. There are so many reasons that a candidate might get rejected that have nothing to do with one's individual performance in th…

Hell, I've interviewed people who were perfect for the job and whom I wanted to hire, only to be told that the financials of the business changed and we can't hire for that position any more.

I'd hope HR told the candidate that the position has been retracted, but maybe the HR system just sent an "unfortunately" email, I have no idea.

Re: Flunking my Anthropic interview again

#243

Post by mgh2 »

jp57 wrote: post #68

One great piece of advice an informal mentor gave me long ago is that there is no information in a rejection . That is to say that you cannot draw any conclusions about yourself or your interviewing technique or your skills or anything from the single accept==0 bit that you typically get back. There are so many reasons that a candidate might get rejected that have nothing to do with one's individual performance in th…

Hiring is all subjective (i.e. bs): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41049365

Re: Flunking my Anthropic interview again

#244

Post by markerz »

Overall, I enjoyed the essay and agree with the messaging. However, there were a few sentences that threw me off. I personally struggle with self-esteem issues, and I found these words extremely triggering, despite being sandwiched between words of self-affirmation.

> My best wasn't good enough. I'm not good enough.

> I don't mind feeling ugly or low-status or whatever -- I know my place.

> I don't need (or deserve) your sympathy.

It's difficult to tell if this is just rhetoric / sarcasm, or if the writer successfully processed through these initial feelings. Either way, I take these moments seriously because it's not healthy to let these feelings grow.

If you feel like you're struggling, I encourage you to talk to someone -- preferably a therapist, but anyone supportive works like a friend or family.

If you're adamant about not talking to someone, consider reading The Gifts of Imperfection by Brené Brown.

Re: Flunking my Anthropic interview again

#245

Post by mr-wendel »

I was selected to represent my high school as a candidate for computer science at a state-level competition. The teacher in charge of selection made it clear that he very much didn't want to pick me -- there just weren't any better options. He explained that my portfolio was all based on user skills. Nothing showed a deeper understanding of the underlying principles of computing. I didn't incorporate any of this feedback and was thoroughly humbled later on. It was a well-deserved loss.

Twenty plus years later and I've still never had more useful interview-related feedback and I'm still grateful he was willing to share that criticism. Now, having been on the flip side of the process quite a bit, I especially appreciate how hard it is to provide meaningful "negative" feedback.

Re: Flunking my Anthropic interview again

#246

Post by dreamcompiler »

eszed wrote: post #115
jp57 wrote: post #68

One great piece of advice an informal mentor gave me long ago is that there is no information in a rejection . That is to say that you cannot draw any conclusions about yourself or your interviewing technique or your skills or anything from the single accept==0 bit that you typically get back. There are so many reasons that a candidate might get rejected that have nothing to do with one's individual performance in th…

This. I've hired in a number of roles, in several industries, and what they've all had in common is that rejection is never personal. My first career was in theatre, which a) is (or at least was, back in the day?) much more competitive than tech - par was one callback (ie, second screening) per 100 auditions, and one casting per 10 callbacks; and b) is genuinely, deeply vulnerable - you have to bring your whole self…

I'm a computer engineer, EMT, and firefighter. I have scooped up brain matter from hot asphalt and run into burning buildings (without even getting paid for it). People ask me how I can do this. I dunno. Training and experience I guess. Doesn't bother me.

But the idea of standing on a stage pretending to be someone else fills me with sheer terror. Even worse would be trying out for that job 100 times and getting rejected every time.

I don't know how actors do it. My hat's off to you.

Re: Flunking my Anthropic interview again

#247

Post by sneak »

DangitBobby wrote: post #205
WalterBright wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The HR handbooks say that for good reason. Telling a candidate why they were rejected means they'll argue with you, or worse, file a lawsuit.

I'm not convinced they'd prevail in court. Seems like one of those truthisms about American litigiousness that wouldn't bear out in practice.

Doesn’t matter. Simply defending against the claim costs significant money, and you can’t recover those costs.

Best to avoid the claim altogether.

Re: Flunking my Anthropic interview again

#248

Post by sneak »

kjkjadksj wrote: post #176
libraryofbabel wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And unfortunately, from the point of view of the company, this is a feature not a bug: * to the company the cost of a false positive (bad hire) is very very much higher than the cost of a false negative (passing on a good candidate). * AI companies have a large pool of strong candidates to interview * Therefore they are incentivized to make their interview process hard enough that a poor candidate almost never passes…

Why is it that most other jobs especially low skill take the opposite approach? You screw up or demonstrate your incompetence on your first day on a construction job site you are let go right then.

They don’t have the money to hire lawyers to pursue discrimination suits, and the potential SME employers frequently don’t have the balance sheet to be collectible.

It’s a different ballgame when you can gamble $20k to make $1M.

Re: Flunking my Anthropic interview again

#249

Post by satisfice »

I will add to some of the other excellent comments here: my time as a hiring manager at Apple and other Silicon Valley companies convinced me that I can never know the real reason I do not get a gig.

I saw good people rejected for stupid reasons, illegal reasons, and borderline reasons. It’s just a decision that is personal and largely irrational to the people who control the process.

Many people in a position to hire want someone they believe they can control. Do you come off as a doormat? Congratulations, you are more employable.

Many hiring managers want to be with attractive people. Are you attractive?

Re: Flunking my Anthropic interview again

#250

Post by DangitBobby »

sneak wrote: post #247
DangitBobby wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not convinced they'd prevail in court. Seems like one of those truthisms about American litigiousness that wouldn't bear out in practice.

Doesn’t matter. Simply defending against the claim costs significant money, and you can’t recover those costs. Best to avoid the claim altogether.

Still dubious. I don't think miniscule risk justifies shitty behavior and making life worse for everyone.
Post reply on HN