The rise of never-ending job interviews • Hacker News Board

Re: The rise of never-ending job interviews

#331

Post by burntoutfire » Mon, Aug 02, 2021, 7:31 AM UTC

silisili wrote: post #119

My one and only Google interview went this way years ago. Each round they'd send me more books to study, which frankly I couldn't be bothered to read given the circumstances. My experience ended when an interviewer in round 3 or 4 asked me an obviously scripted question. I answered sarcastically, he got peeved, and I never heard from them again. I'm not claiming I'm Google caliber, whatever that means. Obviously I'm…

Sounds like a failure of communication on both ends. The interviewer should perhaps be more explicit in his question, i.e. "What file metadata is not stored in its inode?". He skipped the explicit part, since it probably seemed obvious for him. The failure of communication on your end was not picking up the obvious context of the question.

Re: The rise of never-ending job interviews

#332

Post by chovybizzass » Mon, Aug 02, 2021, 7:32 AM UTC

silisili wrote: post #119

My one and only Google interview went this way years ago. Each round they'd send me more books to study, which frankly I couldn't be bothered to read given the circumstances. My experience ended when an interviewer in round 3 or 4 asked me an obviously scripted question. I answered sarcastically, he got peeved, and I never heard from them again. I'm not claiming I'm Google caliber, whatever that means. Obviously I'm…

I was asked if I was the size of a dime how would I get out of a blender. I was like "Honestly, what does this have to do with the Frontend role?"

Re: The rise of never-ending job interviews

#333

Post by elmolino89 » Mon, Aug 02, 2021, 7:35 AM UTC

I am fine that up to the ~3 interviews covering the different aspects (say HR person checking the general personality, IT guy for i.e. Linux sysadmin knowledge mini-test, the team manager). In 2020 after the Covid started, I got into the endless spiral of I believe 6 interviews spaced over a month or so, then the long wait and getting shorter contract with same salary but different from the advert job title. With the back against the wall I took the job. Within 3 months or so (including a 1 month training) they re-posted a job advert for my position. I had to extract from them an info that my contract described as "with almost automatic extension" will not be extended ("we run out of funds"). I work off my posterior for months to get this.

In short: shit on input does not bide well

Re: The rise of never-ending job interviews

#334

Post by yobbo » Mon, Aug 02, 2021, 7:37 AM UTC

silisili wrote: post #119

My one and only Google interview went this way years ago. Each round they'd send me more books to study, which frankly I couldn't be bothered to read given the circumstances. My experience ended when an interviewer in round 3 or 4 asked me an obviously scripted question. I answered sarcastically, he got peeved, and I never heard from them again. I'm not claiming I'm Google caliber, whatever that means. Obviously I'm…

The interview-process is a way for engineers (who might feel underappreciated or insecure) to demonstrate how rare they are, by asking questions no one seems to get right.

At one point, why not just drop the pretence and ask "repeat back to me the algorithm on p. 343 in book xyz."

Re: The rise of never-ending job interviews

#335

Post by burntoutfire » Mon, Aug 02, 2021, 7:37 AM UTC

speedgoose wrote: post #224

dilyevsky wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These numbers are misleading af. Most of those applications are just spam, not really relevant and never get read by any human. I’ve done ~150 interviews for backend roles at google and based on my experience 4 years ago if you make it to onsite you have 5-10% of getting an offer

That confirms that we shouldn't bother if we value our time and energy.

Many people apply to all the FANGS, since the interviewing skillset needed is similar. Moreover, you can reapply every six months. In result, this gives you perhaps 5-10 lottery tickets every year, which means it's very feasible to get in within a year or two (or three).

Re: The rise of never-ending job interviews

#336

Post by ownagefool » Mon, Aug 02, 2021, 7:38 AM UTC

XorNot wrote: post #264

ladberg wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had a similarly bad Google experience that I've talked about before[0] but will copy here: I was asked to do a task that eventually boiled down to a topological sort, and I thought the question consisted of recognizing that the answer was a topological sort and moving on because it was over the phone. However, that was not the case. The interviewer wanted me to code it all out over Google Docs, but I didn't remembe…

At this point I'm pretty sure FAANG hiring is just a random walk. Every now again someone happens to have looked at all the questions they ask recently for that particular interview cycle (or avoid the trap ones like that) and that person gets hired (and then put on the ad targeting team or whatever).

I got an offer for Production Engineering tail end of last year and the interviews were mostly reasonble but the process was mega long.

I took a different offer in the end, but the recruiters reach out every few months for a chat.

Re: The rise of never-ending job interviews

#337

Post by neilv » Mon, Aug 02, 2021, 7:38 AM UTC

bryanrasmussen wrote: post #190

vishnugupta wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obligatory https://sellsbrothers.com/12395

Ok but consider - is there any department at Microsoft other than marketing that Richard Feynman would have been suited for?

Feynman made significant contributions to supercomputing.

https://longnow.org/essays/richard-feynman-connection-machin...

I'm guessing Feynman would've had a much better chance getting hired at old Microsoft, than through the current FAANG/wannabe interview process.

Re: The rise of never-ending job interviews

#338

Post by yobbo » Mon, Aug 02, 2021, 7:39 AM UTC

trinovantes wrote: post #301

ladberg wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had a similarly bad Google experience that I've talked about before[0] but will copy here: I was asked to do a task that eventually boiled down to a topological sort, and I thought the question consisted of recognizing that the answer was a topological sort and moving on because it was over the phone. However, that was not the case. The interviewer wanted me to code it all out over Google Docs, but I didn't remembe…

I once had an in-person interview where they gave me a sheet of printed code and asked me to point out the syntax errors. Some interviewers are absolutely insane.

It is disrespectful, but it is a proxy test for how many hours you have spent reading and writing code in that language.

Re: The rise of never-ending job interviews

#339

Post by epicureanideal » Mon, Aug 02, 2021, 7:42 AM UTC

austhrow743 wrote: post #64

godelski wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then give them a reason to stay (note: it's also not all about money)

Whatever you offer, including non-monetary, someone else can offer and then also spend their training budget on higher comp.

That works if this is a "one time game" (game theory) as opposed to a repeated game.

If an employer does do training, it means they'll probably continue to do more training over time, which helps the employee become more valuable.

If the employer doesn't do training, yes they may be able to allocate the training budget to salary, but they are not going to spend anything training you or letting you work on projects to increase your skills while you're there, unless they absolutely must.

I think people also have some human perception of how they're being treated, and prefer to work for people that invest in them.

Re: The rise of never-ending job interviews

#340

Post by biztos » Mon, Aug 02, 2021, 7:45 AM UTC

ladberg wrote: post #226

silisili wrote: post #119

My one and only Google interview went this way years ago. Each round they'd send me more books to study, which frankly I couldn't be bothered to read given the circumstances. My experience ended when an interviewer in round 3 or 4 asked me an obviously scripted question. I answered sarcastically, he got peeved, and I never heard from them again. I'm not claiming I'm Google caliber, whatever that means. Obviously I'm…

I had a similarly bad Google experience that I've talked about before[0] but will copy here: I was asked to do a task that eventually boiled down to a topological sort, and I thought the question consisted of recognizing that the answer was a topological sort and moving on because it was over the phone. However, that was not the case. The interviewer wanted me to code it all out over Google Docs, but I didn't remembe…

I find it… troubling? That a technical interviewer can’t tell for herself whether your code will work. Wouldn’t you ideally want people who actually understand code to be giving the coding questions?