281–290 of 422 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Netflix is known for being speedy with hiring because they are also speedy with firing under performers. So they see hiring as a relatively low risk proposition and will make decisions faster since the long term effects are greatly lessened.
At least they're making good use of California being an at-will state.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you're losing 40% to taxes you're doing it wrong. Also, stock appreciation. A $500k grant last year is worth $640k this year.
Can you expand on that? How do you get out of paying taxes?
A FANG developer in London has even more opportunities
Max out your pension (Tax relief at 40%) plus presumably an employer match around 5-8%
Put £20k a year into a Stocks and Shares ISA - which puts that beyond tax for income and CGT (apart from stamp duty on share purchases)
Put £30k into premium bonds and than start thinking about VCT's and EIS
This is ignoring any shares scheme you are in
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bias up front: I work at Google. > evidently is for a considerable portion of engineers. I only see evidence that the experience was disappointing for a single Googler, the lunch interviewer, not "a considerable portion" of them. The interviewer's data point is certainly valid, but it's not clear to me how much you can generalize it.
I think it speaks really poorly of an org if they can't even find 6-8 people who they're certain are actually positive about the company to conduct interviews. Especially the lunch interviewer , who is there to get and give a personal perspective on the process.
My understanding is that this isn't a criterion for choosing interviewers, even lunch interviewers. The recruiters who line up interviewers with candidates aren't in a position know the views of the interviewers; I don't know any of them barely at all.
(Disclosure: I work at Google and have conducted many interviews, but I'm speaking only for myself.)
10 years ago I certainly would have while it was still run by Larry and Sergei. Today it very much seems like another Microsoft, IBM, Oracle - if you like working at large corporations great but you won't be doing anything meaningful.
Android, Maps, Search, Youtube, Drive are all mature products that can be labelled as done, their creators have long left so thats just maintenance work.
The closest thing to exciting would be their self driving division which seems to have made bad fundamental choices in LIDAR.
Anything else you can already see has a death timer on it.
“You can pass every interview with A grades and still not get a job, because a senior Googler decides that you're the wrong person to be hired.” Google doesn’t need you. They probably already have a clone of you. They have gobs of rank-and-file SWE effort on reserve should one of their key products fail. The process is designed to entertain the hiring manager and certain key employees. They don’t want you for your pr…
Sounds like you're bitter cause you got rejected by Google. Google interviews tens of thousands of people yearly, you think your one anecdotal experience or that of a few friends allows you to generalize the entire interview experience for every single person interviewing at Google?
Man what a stark contrast to how my Netflix interview went. I was contacted directly by the hiring manager, three days later I was onsite for the phase one interview, three days later I was onsite for the second phase, and I had a verbal offer on my way out the door (for more than I asked for). Came back a week later to sign the paperwork after I emailed with the recruiter a few times about offer details. Started a w…
Isn't Netflix an outlier in how they hire/place anyway? They hire for specific positions versus the rest hiring generally then finding a place to put you. (Team matching coming at the end rather than first) I believe Apple works this way as well. It would explain why I've never been contacted by either. I have no expert level skills in things they're interested in. (I've mostly worked at startups - breadth over depth…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, but like I said, I wasn't an outlier in that respect. Everyone got the same treatment. It always started with a hiring manager reaching out directly.
> Everyone got the same treatment. Even those living 500+ miles away?
Alright, so Mountain View is waking up now and you'll get comments from Googlers, so here is mine. DISCLAIMERS: 1. I work for Google, but these opinions are mine. 2. Everyone at Google is expected to interview, but I no longer do, and have not for two or three years. I have a medical exemption because for anxiety. Trust me, I know just as much as any candidate how stressful it is to be in that room. 3. I interviewed…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The interviewer's data point is certainly valid, but it's not clear to me how much you can generalize it. The fact that someone in the interview chain is willing to tell you significant negative information dramatically raises the Bayesian prior. An interview chain is normally extremely well vetted for people who are positive-only. The fact that this failed is a dramatic cause for concern.
For anyone who hasn't done interviews and are curious, the interview chain is not vetted in any way or form at most places. Typically in bigger companies there is a one or two hour session where you are told what you can and can't ask from a legal perspective. Sometimes there will also be a tech question bank you might be expected to ask questions from. Having worked at four companies I have yet to see there being an…
Whoa! Really?!?!?!
That's a huge difference from any of the places I have worked. If you didn't want to be on the interview loop, nobody in their right mind thought it would be a good idea to command you to do so.
Normally people wanted to be on the interview loop simply so they had input on the people who might become their colleagues. But there were people who wanted nothing to do with the loop and that was okay, too. Maybe you simply had too many deadlines or just were an introverted personality.
But forcing people to do the interview loop? That's seems like a recipe for disaster.