271–280 of 441 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it's a bit silly to get so worked up about this. The test is simply to gauge programming skill in an online test, and they want to check you are not cheating. Though I think they could have worded it without freaking people out: "You are going to be video monitored during the test".
There is no cheating in programming. This is absurd.
As someone who has first hand experienced cheating in interviews I think this is an extremely good move. I know some people in bay area who are making > $100k in cash (no taxes paid) just by answering screening interviews on other people's behalf. This is called "interview by proxy" and the person generally takes first month's salary as remuneration in cash.
If an employer is so disorganized that this doesn't become obvious during the first month of working there, they probably have much greater problems than cheating on their idiotic cargo cult coding tests, and fixing the cheating would do absolutely nothing to save the company.
Large American Inc. is a large company we all know off and which is always somewhere on the front page for some news. Mr X is a manager there how arrived from India on H1B and now perhaps has a green card.
Mr. X brings his younger brother Mr. Y on F1 visa. Mr. Y then joins a consultancy. Consultancy claims Mr. Y has 8 years of experience, knew AngularJS before it was invented (true story) etc. and submits it to Large American Inc. for a project that Mr. X is spearheading.
The consultancy then send a proxy for phone screen and real interviews. The consultancy, Mr. X and Mr. Y all pull a lot of strings here. favours are exchanged.
Mr. Y then joins Large American Inc. as a consultant with a salary of $120K under Mr. X.
Mr. X and Mr. Y conceal the fact that they are closely related.
In many cases consultancy hires another person in India whose job is to give 24x7 phone support whenever Mr. Y has to do his work. Screenshare etc.
As a developer at Amazon who does interviews, what the fuck? I imagine part of this is a response to the very, very large amount of time we spend interviewing interns every winter (I know I typically do 2 or 3 sessions of 3 1-hour interviews in a row). There's just too many interviews to do. Someone wants to innovate and find ways to sort the good from the bad without SDE time spent, I would guess. I hope this isn't…
Coming from the candidates perspective, I loved it. The whole process was efficient and flexible. The coding questions were realistic. The workday simulation was really cool. I get that the author cares about privacy, but without doing what they do there should be no way to make the process as smooth as it is without getting tons of cheating. (It sounds crazy, but being in uni, I've seen crazy amounts of people cheat…
I work for one of the big 5 in demand software companies to work for - originally I would do a live-programming question on Coderpad as part of a first round pass with candidates. I used a pretty basic question as sort of a fizzbuzz - build a Pascal's triangle. The amount of people who took the exact top sample direct from StackOverflow without even attempting to change anything or mask their cheating was astounding.
We've since adopted a better heuristic approach that more accurately reflects the day-to-day work and abandoned the smoke test, but as everyone knows, the most valuable resource any interviewer has is time - the more of that you can save, the better off you are.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Years ago I was flown out to Amazon to interview for them. I had like five interviews that day, all from different teams who were all asking questions that had nothing to do with the job I was applying for, never asking about my relevant experience. They were asking me CS questions and I had never gone to college. They asked about computer design - like, draw a diagram of a computer (I had never made a diagram before…
The reason for the very generic interview is that you won't be on the same team in two years. People move around a lot. If they hire you because you know Angular but fuck all otherwise, they're screwing over the team you're going to be on in two years who need someone that can learn C socket programming ASAP. It's about finding someone who can see things more generally, but then implement solutions with the tools on…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
All of this information is available to an interviewer in person.
No, an in-person interviewer will not know the tabs on my browser or the programs running on my computer. Also at an in-person interview, the interviewee has a symmetrical power relationship to the interviewer in that they can both observe on another. This practice slides the power relationship heavily toward the interviewer. Furthermore, at an in-person interview, the information is not analyzed in an unspecified ma…
I will probably never be in a situation that comes close to the staggering power asymmetry of someone deciding whether or not I will have a job. Even if I'm charged with a crime the court has less power over me than an interviewer, in that its decisions are subject to juries and appeals and I get to watch the proceedings.
The information is analyzed unscientifically according to the personal biases and tastes of the interviewer to form an emotional impression he may not even be conscious of. "Not enough eye contact, I don't like this guy." I'd much rather it be judged by an algorithm trained on actual job performance years in.
Ever heard of Greenhouse? Your interview performance (as reported by the interviewer) is absolutely stored indefinitely in some 3rd party's database subject to unspecified controls.
Amazon has piloted a program to make offers solely on the basis of the test, not just to put a gate in front of the onsite. They should be making it at least as resilient to fraud as an onsite, which is why I think these measures are appropriate.
> Hire Success does not offer nor provide any option where an Applicant is required to submit a photograph or video response to questions because we believe it violates EEOC Guidelines.
I wonder how Proctorio + Amazon reconcile that viewpoint.
Furthermore, if you read the EEOC, some of Proctorio's questions seem to really push the rule: If an employer requires job applicants to take a test, the test must be necessary and related to the job. How is 27:24::64:X related to the job, again?
[0] http://www.hiresuccess.com/blog/is-employment-testing-legal/
Wait, I see nothing wrong with any of this. Obviously Amazon is trying to curb cheating on remote coding/compatibility tests. They don't actually care to collect any info about you beyond what you do during the test. They don't care which websites you visit before or after the test. Or how you use your clipboard - after the test. But during the test, it's not so unreasonable. People do cheat, especially if they can g…
Allegedly.
By all means, this is not unique to Amazon - not that it makes it any better. I did a post-grad interview for Epic (epic.com - healthcare software) in a similar fashion, that was at least as draconian. After passing a 15 minute phone screen, they sent me a link to a service that: * Installed their proprietary software on my Mac * Connected me to a real person who verified my DL against who they were expecting * Had m…
Wow. I would not consent to that. Then again, I run i3wm atop Linux. Even if I wanted to take such a test, it would be... interesting.
By all means, this is not unique to Amazon - not that it makes it any better. I did a post-grad interview for Epic (epic.com - healthcare software) in a similar fashion, that was at least as draconian. After passing a 15 minute phone screen, they sent me a link to a service that: * Installed their proprietary software on my Mac * Connected me to a real person who verified my DL against who they were expecting * Had m…
How long until the latest phishing scam is promising people job interviews?
I had my resume up on several job sites. I got an email using the name (and a plausible email) for a real, quality software company that sent me a list of HR-type questions. I sent some answers (no PII involved), and they told me I had the job and asked for some bank account information.
That obviously set off some alarms, so I followed up with the company and found out that they were being impersonated. I would guess that someone spent 3+ hours just on hustling me - they'd clearly read my resume, which was ironically better than a lot of real interviews.
> You will not be able to open any tabs or windows If I had to code purely from memory, without the benefit of language or library docs, I would not be able to write anything of use. Personally when hiring, I'm not interested in a candidate's memory recall, but the ability to use resources when faced with a new challenge.
I think the anger comes because I see it as a cop out, and I feel I get the short end of the stick in interviews because of it.