IBM's Asshole Test • Hacker News Board

Re: IBM's Asshole Test

#361

Post by scubbo » Thu, May 05, 2022, 2:23 AM UTC

synicalx wrote: post #341

angarg12 wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No it wasn't. Source: I conducted +400 interviews for Amazon. We don't do weird or obscure tests. Your recruiter will explicitly tell you what to expect. It sounds like a mistake.

> We don't do weird or obscure tests. I beg to differ. The one and only time I've interviewed for an engineering role at AWS, I was told to be successful I would need to memorise a list of "management principles" handed down by none other than Bezos himself, all of which were meaningless generic platitudes that could have easily been copy pasted from anywhere. And sure enough, they quizzed me on them quite thoroughly…

No post body was provided.

Re: IBM's Asshole Test

#362

Post by Spinnaker_ » Thu, May 05, 2022, 2:24 AM UTC

yes_really wrote: post #317

hnarn wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't think it's ethical to evaluate a candidate's interactions when they weren't informed they were being evaluated. That makes about as much sense as saying that you shouldn’t be held responsible for stealing office supplies because no one informed you that there were cameras installed. If you treat cab drivers and other service personnel badly, that’s because you’re a shit person. It’s really that simple. I’ve…

If you cheat on your partner you are also a "shit person". Do you think employers should reject candidates if they know they cheated on a romantic relationship?

Honestly, if I somehow knew that the candidate cheated on their partner, then yes, I would reject them. I doubt I will ever find myself in that position.

I did have a coworker cheat on their spouse. I certainly lost respect for them, avoided working with them whenever possible, and cut off the non-professional aspect of our relationship.

Re: IBM's Asshole Test

#363

Post by moistly » Thu, May 05, 2022, 2:29 AM UTC

wfme wrote: post #352

moistly wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But I don’t ignore morals, so your counterpoint is moot.

Hahah right except that in this case the reward is purely intrinsic for returning to pay, while leaving without anyone knowing results in an extrinsic reward ($). "Being rewarded" is generally considered extrinsic otherwise you could just not do some bad thing and claim the feeling of knowing you didn't do the bad thing is a great reward in itself.

Dunno why you are so determined to say that my good deed (not stealing) was not rewarded. Cashier explicitly stated “honesty should be rewarded” and knocked three or four bucks off the price. Those extra dollar bills in my wallet are very much extrinsic. Why are you being so damn weird about it?

Re: IBM's Asshole Test

#364

Post by HackOfAllTrades » Thu, May 05, 2022, 2:31 AM UTC

I think of these as a "Star Trek" test. You know: Wesley is confronted with "his deepest fear" during entrance exams for Star Fleet, Counselor Troi can't pass a holodeck test for "command responsibilities" until she's willing to order Jordi to do a suicide repair. I'm sure there were others. The common theme is supposed to be that the obvious test is a fake and they're really testing for something else. They're all bullshit. Every single one of them falls apart as soon as people start talking about them with each other, not to mention they're just begging to be abused by the testing authority, or entice corruption.

Re: IBM's Asshole Test

#365

Post by smegsicle » Thu, May 05, 2022, 2:34 AM UTC

DarylZero wrote: post #358

telchior wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That seems like an unnecessarily convoluted interpretation of a simple idea: does the candidate act like an asshole to a powerless person? OP can report back on what the bar was, but I doubt people were getting rejected simply for being aloof or untalkative. And it's unfair in the opposite direction to try to apply the "Magical Negro" trope to anyone with a blue-collar job. By that bar -- it would be better to comple…

How is it convoluted? Maybe the powerless person is a homophobe. Is that complicated or unrealistic? This story is supposedly about an actual taxi driver, not a plant from HR. It's absurd to trust this person like this.

> actual taxi driver, not a plant from HR

sounds like both

what do you mean when you say "Maybe the powerless person is a homophobe" ?

Re: IBM's Asshole Test

#366

Post by jameshart » Thu, May 05, 2022, 2:39 AM UTC

genewitch wrote: post #204

jameshart wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Asking for character references from someone who has interacted with a candidate is perfectly fine. I think where this might get dodgy is with the possibility that some of the candidates might have tipped this driver, which puts us in the position of asking for an opinion about several candidates from someone who might have been compensated by some of them.

if i were to institute something like this, the driver would be fairly (and well) compensated to do this task. Any tips would be handed over at the end, so there's no consideration of compensation involved. Obviously tipping is a data point, but it wouldn't influence the drivers report beyond that checkbox.

Now we're adding wage-theft on top of both assessing candidates on their disposable wealth, and accepting and keeping payment from them? The ethics get pretty muddy the further down this path we walk.

Re: IBM's Asshole Test

#367

Post by apocolyps6 » Thu, May 05, 2022, 2:40 AM UTC

DarylZero wrote: post #358

telchior wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That seems like an unnecessarily convoluted interpretation of a simple idea: does the candidate act like an asshole to a powerless person? OP can report back on what the bar was, but I doubt people were getting rejected simply for being aloof or untalkative. And it's unfair in the opposite direction to try to apply the "Magical Negro" trope to anyone with a blue-collar job. By that bar -- it would be better to comple…

How is it convoluted? Maybe the powerless person is a homophobe. Is that complicated or unrealistic? This story is supposedly about an actual taxi driver, not a plant from HR. It's absurd to trust this person like this.

The driver was a specific person that the company knew. Maybe they were a secret homophobe or something, but you could say that of all the company's employees with just as high a likelihood.

> It's absurd to trust this person like this

If your friend told you "man, my last customer was a jerk" you would distrust that?

Re: IBM's Asshole Test

#368

Post by [deleted] » Thu, May 05, 2022, 2:44 AM UTC

IggleSniggle wrote: post #163

bloodyplonker22 wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I once interviewed a guy who was going to work on a different team than mine who, 20 minutes in, I knew he was going to pass everyone's interview. I then proceeded to give him a "take home test" which was actually my project for the sprint, but framed in a generic manner. He was a much better and faster programmer than I, and he completed it beyond my expectations. I made the modifications to make it work with my pro…

You, sir or madam, are an absolutely asshole. I admire your out-of-the-box thinking and your honesty, but I do not admire your natural proclivity towards exploitation.

[deleted]

Re: IBM's Asshole Test

#369

Post by phnofive » Thu, May 05, 2022, 2:45 AM UTC

genewitch wrote: post #217

bityard wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I interviewed with Google once around the same time frame. The position I interviewed for was something along the lines of datacenter operations. I did my interview from a local Google sales office and interviewed with three other employees via video call. This was around the time that Skype was fairly new, but whatever software they were using was clearly internal to Google. Anyway, I ended up talking with 3 enginee…

so, what was the answer, from the lecture? what had you missed? Realistically if i was in datacenter ops and a server wouldn't boot i'd unrack it and rack a new one and let the dev/ops whatever team reprovision. Heck, i did this when i was just a cloud engineer, unracked from a local (non-cloud) facility and brought back machines to the office, to be RMA'd, just to help out. I get the idea that the interviewer had a…

Yep, seems more like a cattle vs. pets question as retold. That may have been a newer concept at the time, so no amount of Socratic reasoning would get you there.

Re: IBM's Asshole Test

#370

Post by jethkl » Thu, May 05, 2022, 2:45 AM UTC

otterley wrote: post #175

jackblemming wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shockingly, there's plenty of competent CEOs who aren't assholes, but we don't idolize them because Americans love the idea of the genius asshole.

Warren Buffett being a model example of a non-asshole CEO. Same with Kenneth Chenault at American Express, Indra Nooyi at Pepsi, and countless others.

Also Oprah Winfrey. Reports are that her public persona (warm, charismatic, friendly) is genuine.