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

They Rejected Us

rejected.us

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 385 posts

Re: They Rejected Us

#361

Post by gdy »

tathougies wrote: post #216
jakeinspace wrote: post #24

This is like It Gets Better, but for fragile software engineers who obviously are talented enough to make 6 figures some place else. I understand rejection can feel personal, especially when so much of your life and identity comes from the work you've put into mastering some field, but this doesn't seem like the healthiest mindset. I'm just leaving college now and don't have much of a perspective yet, but the applica…

Seriously though. The issue is tying your self-worth to getting accepted be facebook, apple, google, etc. A healthy person, when rejected from a company, realizes that the company did not need their skills at this time. This says nothing about the quality of their skillset, just that it's unneeded. Sort of how, if Linus Torvalds himself showed up to a frontend development interview, he probably wouldn't get the job.

A 'healthy person', to use your term, after rejection would realize where her skills are lacking and work or study hard to improve her skills, not delude herself like you suggest.

Re: They Rejected Us

#363

Post by brianpgordon »

Topgamer7 wrote: post #131
sho wrote: post #103

I still can't get over the fact that Google rejected mxcl, author of homebrew, possibly the most important piece of software on OSX, because he couldn't remember some useless piece of easily-googleable (ha) CS trivia on the spot. Even though they all run it internally. If that isn't the purest, most concentrated form of arbitrary, blind, own-goal beaureaucratic corporate idiocy I don't know what is. And people actual…

I think people follow process a little to much in interviews. You should be testing the knowledge that you expect them to have, and testing that they can problems solve/adapt and work out a problem. I'd prefer to ask a person a question how to conceptually solve a problem, instead of trying to have them verbatim write out a linked list implementation from memory.

What do you mean from memory? If you can't remember how to implement a linked list, you don't know anything about data structures. It's unbelievable to me that someone could blank out and forget how to implement a linked list.

Re: They Rejected Us

#364

Post by ralmidani »

mikekchar wrote: post #352
ralmidani wrote: post #204

I graduated from Fullstack Academy, and I've been rejected outright by most companies I applied to; only a couple have given me over-the-phone interviews, and nobody brought me on-site. I have all but stopped applying, am doing freelance work to keep my skills sharp and pay the bills, and plan to start my own company in the future. My motto: If you can't join 'em, beat 'em. Edit: most companies I applied to are not o…

A couple of pointers to help you forward. First, don't give up. Keep building up your experience and portfolio. To be honest, Fullstack Academy graduate means to me that you're completely entry level. That's fine, but when I'm hiring I almost never want entry level people. And even if I do want entry level people, I've got about 1000 CVs from people to choose from (and that is not an exaggeration). Landing that first…

Thank you for your honest advice! It's great to learn about the thought processes going on at the "other side of the table."

Some more context which clarifies my decision to "pave my own road":

-Before Fullstack Academy, I founded/co-founded two startups (we succeeded in building the products, but failed at marketing). I've also taken some actual CS courses. Bootcamp filled gaps in my knowledge and taught me how to collaborate better, but it wasn't my first time coding or interacting with fellow coders.

-Most of the jobs I applied to are entry-level. If a company is looking for senior talent, they should state that clearly and not waste junior developers' time.

-When I get excited about a company, I put a lot of time and energy into my cover letter/introductory email. In return, most companies didn't even bother with a template rejection.

Re: They Rejected Us

#365

Post by newguyintown2 »

bitwize wrote: post #97
codingdave wrote: post #77

I like rejection. Well, maybe 'like' is the wrong word, but I appreciate the results it brings to my life. I deeply believe that a healthy working environment only comes when both the employer and the employee are right for each other. I would rather fight through rejections to find a good home than have string of mediocre roles that aren't quite right.

You'll like it a lot less when you need a way to feed your family (or just yourself), and rejection is all you get. You can't pay your rent and grocery bills with rejection.

Aye. I'm making $13 an hour while trying to apply to every job that I can, while building out my portfolio projects to improve my resume, and grinding LeetCode. Needless to say I can't really afford to socialize or eat out. It really sucks after a few weeks :/

Re: They Rejected Us

#366

Post by coolwhhip »

ravenstine wrote: post #328
rhinoceraptor wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your first job is your job, your second job is working on OSS on github to make yourself look good, and your third job is interviewing :^)

> your second job is working on OSS on github to make yourself look good Sounds good on paper. In practice, what people do on Github is worthless . I've only one company ever actually looked at what I made on GitHub. Otherwise, they'll never check out what I've done even if a project is listed on a resume. Nobody has the time or amount of shits to give to actually review your own code. Very few people I know who are…

It’s a bit extreme to say putting projects on GitHub is worthless when it comes to generating job opportunities. In my experience, if you’ve got a project that delivers a ton of value to a suffiently large set of people, somebody usually will reach out.

Re: They Rejected Us

#367

Post by fooddood »

hinkley wrote: post #144
NotAnEconomist wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I spent most of my college evening getting drunk with philosophy majors and pretending my math degree meant more than my CS fallback -- but I haven't found the corporate interview system to be that terrible. I do however think it's a game that conflicts with certain personality types, including myself early in my career. I'm always curious what you (or anyone else!) think could be done better.

The all day interview process selects for a kind of person who is confortable with arduous processes. With poor scalability. IMO any team with an SLA should be avoiding these people like the plague, because they will tolerate bullshit manual processes that take all day. They have no motivation to make foolproof automated processes with good visibility and repeatability. The smartest of them will fight attempts to cha…

Can you please elaborate more on the Fire All Heroes philosophy? I looked into it and couldn't find anything describing it in depth

Re: They Rejected Us

#368

Post by saidajigumi »

bradleyjg wrote: post #303
saidajigumi wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Vital meta lesson from this: I was rejected by Fashionable BigCo X and Y but then eventually got a job at Fashionable BigCo Z When we see that repeated for many successful people, I hope the takeaway becomes: your interview process is probably not doing what you think it is. In some cases this extends to the entire work culture. E.g. workplaces that situate themselves in a mindset equivalent to "we must hire the best…

Do you suggest always hiring the first person that applies? There has to be some choosing function.

No. But I think many of our filters are bogus. Some of these are easy: "Did you complete a traditional four-year CS degree at ?" should be considered downright obscene as a front-line filtering function. It robs your team of great talent, and destroys any attempt to hire diverse candidates. And by "diverse" I mean invaluable team members who will bring fresh perspective to your problems, your understanding of your users, and more. There have always been many "alternative" paths into computing, now moreso than ever.

A concrete example: A place I interviewed in my last search uses pair programming extensively in their day-to-day (and have lovely twinned monitor/keyboard hardware setups to support this!) They use that in their tech interviews as well. You and a candidate sit and talk about code. It's a lovely experience, and far more grounded in the work than just about any whiteboard interview.

Pair-programming isn't the takeaway here. It's that this org built an interview model which was virtually identical to their actual working model.

Re: They Rejected Us

#369

Post by vonmoltke »

dehrmann wrote: post #347
dionian wrote: post #15

If there are two good candidates and I pick one of them, it doesn't necessarily mean you were 'rejected', you just weren't selected. I've been 'rejected' by plenty of companies but I try not to take it too personally.

It's not just that. Candidates can be perfectly capable and qualified, but have work style, or even values, that don't align with the company. Or they're not a good fit because the recruiter who found them isn't recruiting for a team where they'd be a good fit. So it's not just they they weren't selected, they weren't selected for that role .

> Candidates can be perfectly capable and qualified, but have work style, or even values, that don't align with the company.

That is the candidate's decision to make, not the company's.

Re: They Rejected Us

#370

Post by bradleyjg »

saidajigumi wrote: post #368
bradleyjg wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you suggest always hiring the first person that applies? There has to be some choosing function.

No. But I think many of our filters are bogus. Some of these are easy: "Did you complete a traditional four-year CS degree at ?" should be considered downright obscene as a front-line filtering function. It robs your team of great talent, and destroys any attempt to hire diverse candidates. And by "diverse" I mean invaluable team members who will bring fresh perspective to your problems, your understanding of your us…

I agree 100%. I myself don’t have a CS degree. I thought though with your emphasis on training great employees rather than finding them you were talking about hiring people that maybe aren’t the great programmers. It’s hard enough to design a selection process for exactly what you are looking for (i.e. programming ability), I have no idea how one would go about identifying candidates with great potential that can’t already program.
Post reply on HN