Live data from Hacker News

The dystopian world of software engineering interviews

jarednelsen.dev

281–290 of 851 posts

Re: The dystopian world of software engineering interviews

#281
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Warning Heavy Cynicism Ahead -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

I've worked at my current job for a long, long time now. Every year or so I decide to peak my head out from it and test the job waters. I get nearly the same set of 4 outcomes each time. I have over 7 years of experience with everything from front-end development to sysops, devops, and management. I've built entire companies by myself in months. Albeit buggy ones.

I bloody hate interviewing.

Outcomes:

1. I get rejected for messing up a programming fundamentals question. Which, honestly stings because, yeah, I should probably be more informed. But, currently, I ain't got no time fo dat. I'm too busy solving a bombardment of problems like: "Hey, programmer X quit, I know you don't work with X language at all but we need this fixed, yesterday".

2. I spend a bunch of my precious time writing a fully functional code test, to be inexplicably rejected. Maybe because I didn't write unit tests? Maybe because I didn't use doc blocks. Maybe I didn't make the code reusable enough given their imaginary scope. Who knows.

3. They're super excited to hire me for a position I am not at all qualified for. Usually for a ridiculously minuscule salary. I had a company ask me, after spending 2 hours on a phone interview, to build and run their development shop. They wanted to on board 50 employees by my 6 month mark, and completely dismantle their overseas workforce.

4. I'm just plain ghosted.

I'm absolutely sick of potential employers asking me why I am excited to work with them. Well sir, to be honest, appearances and mission statements are superficial. I am excited to experience something new. I really hope that your shop lives up to the hype. I am excited to learn.

Take note employers. Saying pretty much anything else is either ignorance or a lie carefully concocted over the countless hours you require of potential employees, just to get in the door. Your interview question responses are almost never genuine talent. They are hours of memorization. I know, because I've asked, and answered them.

Why even require a resume? I've spent hours cultivating a bomb resume and 19 out of 20 employers, have literally no idea what it says.

Employer: "So what languages are you familiar with?" They're literally listed on the resume that you required I send you, with demonstrations. The one I customized to your company and needs.

A different employer: "So, you don't actively work on any opensource projects, we can review"? No, I try to have a life when I am not working, and go outside. I know, hiss...

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Right now 7:23 PM on Valentines day, I am trying to speed up a program, an MVP, that I rebuilt in a week. One that I acquired after the prior developer got fired. One of my many, many projects. This one is particularly pesky as I am also trying to build out another app that is due, about 23 days from now.

Send help.

Re: The dystopian world of software engineering interviews

#282
post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hypothesis: There's such a flood of qualified labor that employers can afford to arbitrarily shrink the pool of applicants without significantly worsening their outcomes. Their behavior indicates that just the top N% of the market is enough to fill the needs of all selective companies. "Top" can be a semi-random filter, since the pool of basically competent people is much deeper than N. (There's also a much larger fl…

Not exactly. If every employer randomly threw out 80% of the resumes without looking at them, and then perfectly evaluated the remaining 20%, then you would expect that all qualified developers would have a job (they just might have to apply to several jobs to get an offer).

I don't think the filter is literally random. It's a poor predictor of success, applied inconsistently.

Just from what I've heard and experienced, I'd guess that if N = Q (percentage of qualified workers), everyone in N would find some job as you describe. Alice gets Apple and Google but not Netflix, Bob gets Netflix but not Apple.

Could Alice do Bob's job at Netflix, or vice-versa? Absolutely. Does Apple care they could have had Bob? Does Netflix care they could have had both? Not really.

Everyone in N lands somewhere, eventually, enough though a better process could have had a better outcome overall. Maybe Alice really wanted Netflix; maybe she picks Netflix-like projects at Apple that aren't Apple's best use of her skills. Maybe that rejection shook her confidence or maybe she's distracted getting ready for another Netflix interview next year. (She's learned she has to study really hard at who-knows-what to prove she's capable of doing a job she's already doing.)

Does Apple care? Not really. Her manager might, but not Apple. Inefficient allocation is death by a thousand cuts.

The greater problem is when Q > N and the difference keeps growing. If you take the Googler joke of PhDs as protobuf jockeys at face value, that's where we've been for a while. But I don't know if we are.

Re: The dystopian world of software engineering interviews

#283
post #265

> I lie somewhere between junior and senior and it seems to be slim pickings for my experience level. In some countries I see job postings with a third experience level: "Medior". Is there an equivalent in English?

The term in English is "mid-level" though most find it somewhat derogatory.

Re: The dystopian world of software engineering interviews

#284

In addition to all of the very dystopian examples given in this post, there are other non-technical, super-dystopian things that have been popping up as "trends" in the tech industry. Ever heard of top-grading? It's the most oppressive interview technique of all time. A series of grueling multi-person interviews. A retrospective of all work experiences since high school . You also have to get multiple prior employers…

A few words on top grading. We are use a top grading like process, and are pretty flexible on the references part of it. It is just a long conversation. I think it is a structured and simple way to talk about a person and where they have been. Yes, it is comprehensive, but it works well. We hire almost all candidates that have made it to the top grading stage of our hiring process. We don’t use it to find liars and d…

So... are you hiring right now?

Re: The dystopian world of software engineering interviews

#285
Every time I read one of these articles, I'm surprised at the complexity of the coding questions the candidates had to solve. When I interviewed for my jobs, the questions were much simpler, and as an interviewer myself, I (a) pick much simpler questions and (b) even so, the candidates tend to have plenty of struggles solving them.

Am I really missing an army of engineers who can write an involved image filter in 45 minutes without that actually being their specialization?

Re: The dystopian world of software engineering interviews

#286
If all you care about is money, go bust your butt on leetcode and ace a FAANG interview. If you care about a work-life balance, and having a big impact on a small team, work for a medium-small startup and negotiate a flexible schedule.

Personally I get a huge kick out of making massive improvements to a small business's tech and infrastructure. The lack of bureaucracy is a freedom that is often taken for granted. If you have the vision and drive, you can improve the business's processes and product offerings by leaps and bounds...something I would argue is not readily available at a big company. Smaller companies are also much more willing and able to negotiate with you to help balance your life. A 4-day work week for example.

Again speaking anecdotally, I don't need that much money. I certainly don't need FAANG-level compensation. If I'm going to work somewhere, it's going to be because I want to be with those people, working on those problems, and having a big impact. Not because of the fat paycheck.

Re: The dystopian world of software engineering interviews

#287
post #279

A few months ago I interviewed with Major CDN Company for a front-end dev position. They sent me a take-home React/NextJS project stub with dependencies and such already defined, and instructions to finish building out the full app. "Perfect!", I thought. No stage pressure, plenty of opportunities for going an extra mile. They encouraged me to get creative and I did; it met all the requirements and then some. I proud…

unlucky! The buddha said we are promised two certain things in life: suffering and death. Everything else is a bonus.

Re: The dystopian world of software engineering interviews

#289

Comedian Daniel Tosh had a bit about people that claimed to be smart, it's just that they were just bad at taking tests. He said, "oh, so you struggle with the part where we find out what you actually know?" I hear a lot of complaints about the "typical" software engineering hiring process, and it usually comes from the people that don't do well within the current system. Could the process be improved? Almost certain…

High pressure coding is a completely different skill that most engineers aren’t going for.

Unless you’re hiring for a detective that has to write code to stop crimes in progress why are companies so focused on testing coding under pressure.

Re: The dystopian world of software engineering interviews

#290
post #115

When my classmates were preparing interview coding questions, I was working on a mini TCP implementation and a toy kernel. AWS rejected me since I failed to write prefect code to traverse a tree in level order. Google did not even give me an interview since I told the campus recruiter I have not prepared for the coding questions. Then I ended up with an internship at CoreOS and created etcd. I am glad that they did n…

Hah! Reminds me of https://twitter.com/mxcl/status/608682016205344768 . Cynical answer though — Google does not want people like you. They don't want to hire entrepreneurs or inventors. They want people who can churn out code when given specific instructions, and that is what their interview process optimizes for.

> Cynical answer though

Honestly I don't think it's that cynical - it just makes sense. There are the people who can and will do that stuff - and do it happily - and they would presumably be the easiest to hire as junior devs. Google views it as a stepping stone towards their next product launch, and the programmers see it as a stepping stone to a more enjoyable job.

And then the inventors and entrepreneurs create their own projects, and typically both produce and earn more than they would've at the company.

It kind of works out in everyone's best interest (although I'm sure the Google hiring managers sometimes regret missing out on the guy who invented New Cool Thing, and the guy that invented New Cool Thing is probably still a bit miffed that he couldn't land or get through an interview for a job he/she was clearly qualified for).

Post reply on HN