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

They Rejected Us

rejected.us

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 385 posts

Re: They Rejected Us

#261

Post by QML »

tlackemann wrote: post #170
Aunche wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google tells you what to prepare for during an interview. I'm sure that if Max Howell spent a few hours reviewing data structures and algorithms like the rest of us, he would have passed with flying colors. His hostility towards his interview experience only reinforces that he likely wouldn't be a good fit in a large corporation like Google.

And that's exactly why I would never apply for Google. Despite me having years of leading product teams and enterprise applications, the fact that I need to "study" for an interview is asinine.

How else can you have a standard benchmark for testing applicants against? The issue with just looking at background experience, in my belief, is that there’s too much noise, not enough data, to properly gauge someone.

Re: They Rejected Us

#262

Post by hartator »

yongjik wrote: post #177
sho wrote: post #103

I still can't get over the fact that Google rejected mxcl, author of homebrew, possibly the most important piece of software on OSX, because he couldn't remember some useless piece of easily-googleable (ha) CS trivia on the spot. Even though they all run it internally. If that isn't the purest, most concentrated form of arbitrary, blind, own-goal beaureaucratic corporate idiocy I don't know what is. And people actual…

> he couldn't remember some useless piece of easily-googleable (ha) CS trivia on the spot. Or that's what he claimed. > Even though they all run it internally. That's what he claimed as well. But never heard of Homebrew while I was at Google, though I had a Macbook for 5+ years. (Well I can't definitely say my Macbook never ran Homebrew - after all, when you are in Google, all such things are handled by dedicated tea…

Hum, how can you do development work with HomeBrew? You install packages one-by-one?

Re: They Rejected Us

#263

Post by smoyer »

davnicwil wrote: post #147
jakeinspace wrote: post #24

This is like It Gets Better, but for fragile software engineers who obviously are talented enough to make 6 figures some place else. I understand rejection can feel personal, especially when so much of your life and identity comes from the work you've put into mastering some field, but this doesn't seem like the healthiest mindset. I'm just leaving college now and don't have much of a perspective yet, but the applica…

Yeah, I like the idea of this site but was disappointed to find most of the entries being something like I was rejected by Fashionable BigCo X and Y but then eventually got a job at Fashionable BigCo Z Which is great, it really is, but not really all that interesting (sorry!). You've only been rejected in a very narrow sense. Everyone has an off day, or off interviews. You were actually accepted by the mainstream, ev…

Well ... doing a little mental statistics it looks to me like you should just apply to Twitter in the first place if you never want to get rejected during your job search.

Re: They Rejected Us

#264

Post by swat535 »

dwild wrote: post #212
gamesbrainiac wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Package manages often determine the success of an entire ecosystem. To give you an idea of how hard this is, Go still has not been able to come up with proper package management. Some of the best engineers in the world built that language.

> Package manages often determine the success of an entire ecosystem. Nobody said it wasn't great, just that whether he is good to make a package manager, doesn't determine if he is a good fit for anything else. If that hiring position was to build a system to manage packages, sure, he is probably the best hire for that, but theses skills are specific to exactly this task. A great interviewer though would have kept h…

You're absolutely right. the best metric is to see how quickly he can reverse a binary tree. now that is grounds for instant dismissal !

Re: They Rejected Us

#265

Post by uxp100 »

johnfn wrote: post #209
jakeinspace wrote: post #24

This is like It Gets Better, but for fragile software engineers who obviously are talented enough to make 6 figures some place else. I understand rejection can feel personal, especially when so much of your life and identity comes from the work you've put into mastering some field, but this doesn't seem like the healthiest mindset. I'm just leaving college now and don't have much of a perspective yet, but the applica…

Is HN really to the point where we are upvoting posts dismissing real people feeling real feelings of inadequacy over some suggestion of “fragility”? Everyone can feel bad. Just because someone could get a job somewhere else doesn’t mean rejection doesn’t sting. That’s like saying that a breakup shouldn’t hurt because you can just get another girlfriend.

But a web page that consisted of people saying "My partner dumped me, but now I'm dating someone much hotter" wouldn't be seen as particularly valuable. Not all diary entries should be public, even if the feelings expressed are "real."

Re: They Rejected Us

#266

Post by vonmoltke »

dwild wrote: post #214
vonmoltke wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your "etc" includes writing the damn thing in the first place, which indicates he is more than qualified for "will contribute to a small portion of software that will be run by a large fraction of the planet's computers". Furthermore, for L5 and up Google is most certainly looking for systems design and engineering leadership skills.

> he is more than qualified for "will contribute to a small portion of software that will be run by a large fraction of the planet's computers". Maybe, but for that part he was in competition with people that were simply better to "contribute to a small portion of software that will be run by a large fraction of the planet's computers".

That's where we come to my second point.

Additionally, the public perception of the Google hiring process (a perception cultivated by Google themselves) is that candidates are not in competition with anybody. It's just "do you clear the bar or not".

Re: They Rejected Us

#267

Post by crispinb »

If I could be bothered (which I can't quite) I'd set up an "I rejected them" alternative: all the companies I wouldn't choose to work for because they are unethical or corrupt or produce trivial crap that's not worth making.

Re: They Rejected Us

#268

Post by robocat »

giarc wrote: post #156
sho wrote: post #103

I still can't get over the fact that Google rejected mxcl, author of homebrew, possibly the most important piece of software on OSX, because he couldn't remember some useless piece of easily-googleable (ha) CS trivia on the spot. Even though they all run it internally. If that isn't the purest, most concentrated form of arbitrary, blind, own-goal beaureaucratic corporate idiocy I don't know what is. And people actual…

Similar to this one. Sebastian McKenzie @sebmck Facebook Got rejected from a junior position at Atlassian for not knowing enough about JavaScript. Shortly after they now use the JavaScript compiler that I wrote across most of their JavaScript stack. Or Ian Devlin @iandevlin Trivago Rejected by the Google HTML5 Developer Expert programme for not knowing enough about HTML5. Apparently being one of the HTML5 Doctors, wr…

In Ian's case, maybe they found people with better HTML5 qualifications, or more likely they found people with the other x relevant skills needed for the programme.

Re: They Rejected Us

#269

Post by dsr_ »

spydum wrote: post #210
bendoernberg wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uhhh why would you be ok with someone who chooses to use their labor to work for a racist/kitten murdering website because it’s a “technical challenge”? I’m sure keeping the Daily Stormer up and running is difficult, but anyone who helps them do it is a nazi who deserves whatever they get.

Because the problem is society seems to redraw it’s ethical boundaries every twenty years or so..

Yeah, twenty years ago it wasn't cool to work for nazis.

And it still isn't. Do you have a different example in mind?

Re: They Rejected Us

#270

Post by paulddraper »

uxp100 wrote: post #265
johnfn wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is HN really to the point where we are upvoting posts dismissing real people feeling real feelings of inadequacy over some suggestion of “fragility”? Everyone can feel bad. Just because someone could get a job somewhere else doesn’t mean rejection doesn’t sting. That’s like saying that a breakup shouldn’t hurt because you can just get another girlfriend.

But a web page that consisted of people saying "My partner dumped me, but now I'm dating someone much hotter" wouldn't be seen as particularly valuable. Not all diary entries should be public, even if the feelings expressed are "real."

Wouldn't it though?

You kind of described r/relationship_advice

Post reply on HN