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

Harder programming questions do a worse job of predicting outcomes

triplebyte.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 540 posts

Re: Harder programming questions do a worse job of predicting outcomes

#311

Post by matwood »

warp_factor wrote: post #299
gameswithgo wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

obscure algorithms are useful. it isn't a perfect system but its better than what most people propose as alternatives, which is to just have an ad hoc conversation. testing whether someone is willing to prepare for a thing is a relevant work skill test too.

So you are saying that companies are hiring people that are willing to prove that they can put "a lot of work" into preparing for interviews that have no relevance to the actual work? I can see that as a valid point, as a way to filter lazy individuals. (In the same way that a college degree is more a way to prove that you can sustain X years of learning things without dropping out). But it will also filter out every…

No relevance would be like when I took the GRE for grad school. I studied things that had zero relevance to the CS program I ended up attending.

Reviewing algorithms for interview prep at least has some relevance to programming. While a candidate may not use that exact algorithm in their day to day job, they are creating ad hoc algorithms all day long. With that said, I don't think time pressure, white boarding algorithms is a very good job performance predictor.

Re: Harder programming questions do a worse job of predicting outcomes

#312

Post by mlthoughts2018 »

sjg007 wrote: post #222
mlthoughts2018 wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I received a cold call from a Lyft recruiter recently for a senior machine learning position. I asked why they were reaching out to me and the recruiter mentioned that it’s an especially hard time to locate experienced machine learning candidates, they don’t have enough applicants. I said I was interested in interviewing but that I would only agree to a process that evaluates me based on my previous work history, and…

I dunno.. flip side to this is that you could name your own price basically.

Not really though. If your price is working in a quiet, private office with a door that shuts, or having humane treatment when you’re being interviewed, then it seems nobody would pay it.

Let’s take their word for it that they are desperate for a machine learning engineer. Then it suggests they care more about mandating workspace conditions (since financial cost even to provide thousands of workers with private offices in dense urban areas is not a realistic excuse not to do it) or trivia during interviews than about business needs.

Re: Harder programming questions do a worse job of predicting outcomes

#313

Post by arrrg »

wolfgke wrote: post #288
sunir wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They have kids. Developing a sentient being is a higher priority and more difficult than developing React Redux.

> They have kids. Developing a sentient being is a higher priority and more difficult than developing React Redux. This is like saying: "I have a time-intense hobby that I prefer over working too much for you.".

I can see this sentence being an interesting Rorschach test. Either you think it’s quite sensible or utterly absurd. My own brain was even flip-flopping around for a bit before coming down on the utterly absurd side.

I think the maybe reasonable counter-argument against your sentence would be that while you personally do not have to value something like raising kids above your work, others very well might and do and there is nothing absurd or weird about that. Your framing betrays a certain kind of worldview where “work” is real and everything else is a mere hobby, a worldview that might be valid for certain people but is certainly not universal.

Re: Harder programming questions do a worse job of predicting outcomes

#314

Post by chrshawkes »

city41 wrote: post #207
Zelphyr wrote: post #76

I see one aspect of this trend of asking programming questions that require a lot of memorization: We have had for the past ~10-15 years people in the workforce (and thus acting as interviewers) who went through a public education system where heavy emphasis was placed on passing tests that required a lot of memorization. I'd be interested to know how many of these interviewers actually think they're able to identify…

At a previous company we interviewed by giving the candidate a choice of a dozen or so problems. All of medium-ish difficulty. Then we together sat at a pairing station and paired on the problem for 2 hours. Candidate can use the internet and anything they want really, as close to real coding as we could make it. Two hours was enough to get into the problem a bit, and get a feel for what they would be like to work wi…

You sit next to the guy the whole time? Eat lunch next to him too? Having some stranger over your shoulder is not real coding either imo.

Re: Harder programming questions do a worse job of predicting outcomes

#315

Post by erik_seaberg »

alboy wrote: post #250
chooseaname wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only way I would consider paying for a course like this is if, upon successfully completing it, I would not have to do the technical portion of the interview at companies I applied to. They would accept this cert and just do the soft skills interview.

One could argue that CS undergraduate degrees are perfectly suited for this purpose. FAANG & Co don't seem to care for that. You've successfully passed a few dozen exams at MIT or Stanford? Well, let's make the reasonable assumption that you have no clue about algorithms and data structures and start with our third whiteboarding session, that should be a way better proxy for your knowledge.

Those incentives are misaligned. Not every law school grad can pass the bar.

Re: Harder programming questions do a worse job of predicting outcomes

#316

Post by drblast »

warp_factor wrote: post #309
drblast wrote: post #273

Google recruiters call me a lot. I think I'd do a good if not stellar job working there. I've passed multiple FAANG interviews and been very successful as a senior developer. In my email I have an "interview prep packet" from them that essentially tells me to brush up on algorithms and read Cracking the Coding Interview to prepare for their interview process. I'm fairly happy in my job. If they offered more money or…

You wouldn't be a good fit for Google. With their algorithmic interviews that require college-grad level of studying, they filter for people that are ready to follow orders without complaining. That's who they want to hire at the end of the day: some coders that don't get too critical about their job and do what they are asked to do, even if it is repetitive, stupid and doesn't really make sense (such as re-studying…

I was a naval officer in a prior life, and my current manager loves that I get the job done, whatever it is, without complaint.

I'm pretty much the opposite of what you think, so if my desire to study for the algorithm interview is your litmus test for that, kinda proves my point.

Not everyone that would be good for Google has a burning desire to work for Google. Google might want to consider that.

Re: Harder programming questions do a worse job of predicting outcomes

#317

Post by chrshawkes »

wiremine wrote: post #132

At my consultancy we recently streamlined our interview process: 1. Phone screen which takes 15 or 20 minutes. 2. The candidate fills out an essay, including showing us some code they're proud of. 3. If the essay ticks the boxes we conduct a 1 hour on site interview. We use the same a set of questions for every candidate, so the investment is easy to manage, and our team has a shared set of expectations on what is go…

I immediately decline your type of interviews and my life is most likely better for it.

Re: Harder programming questions do a worse job of predicting outcomes

#318

Post by chrshawkes »

sigfubar wrote: post #55
komali2 wrote: post #14

>how clean their code is, I got bit in the ass by this one as triplebyte itself. They asked me to make a tic tac toe game, and gave me iirc 30 minutes (less?) to do it. Except, it wasn't "build a tic tac to" game, first it was "draw a board to the console," "take user input from the console," etc a bunch of instructions in a convoluted path that perhaps another engineer would do when knowing from the outset that the…

You failed your Triplebyte interview because you neglected an extremely important aspect of the job: communication. You made assumptions about the ask which turned out to be grossly out of tune with those of the interviewer. In the real world, engineers are often left holding the bag when other participants of the process leave out important details. It’s our job to ask questions and establish the boundaries of each…

Not in a 30 minute interview.

Re: Harder programming questions do a worse job of predicting outcomes

#320

Post by matwood »

je42 wrote: post #111

I usually ask what's your strongest language; then ask questions about that programming language. f.e. if it is python: > how would you explain the with statement to a junior developer ? then increasingly difficult questions that go into the language runtime/concepts. one other favourite question of mine is: > Imagine, you got a standard website the serves data from a database. When a customer types in the url into t…

There is so much that can happen between the browser making a request and receiving a response, that someone could completely gloss over the OSI model and still talk for a very long time.

I've toyed around with starting my answer with what happens when the physical return key on the keyboard is pressed. Could spend quite a bit of time on what happens before the browser even knows the return key was pressed :D

Post reply on HN