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

IBM's Asshole Test

johnpublic.mataroa.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 604 posts

Re: IBM's Asshole Test

#441

Post by DocTomoe »

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.

Even if he was (and he'd be a ridiculous taxi driver if the first thing he did was sharing his political opinions [though that's not unheard of, I've been riding with that kind of service provider]), not immediately going ballistic would be a quality I expect hires to have. No-one needs angry activist mob person joining the team.

Re: IBM's Asshole Test

#442

Post by m463 »

imglorp wrote: post #152
Victerius wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I started reading my brain went straight to Von Neumann. Now I really want to read a fanfic about a story where John Von Neumann is invited to a Google interview.

Maybe not Von Neumann at google, but how about Feynman at Microsoft? https://sellsbrothers.com/12395

> We are going to recommend you for immediate hiring into the marketing department.

I am reminded of this Feynman story:

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

Re: IBM's Asshole Test

#443

Post by Dracophoenix »

zw123456 wrote: post #412
Dracophoenix wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What were the qualities need for an executive then?

Beats the heck out of me. You tell me, Like I said, I am not sure I know what that even is TBH.

I wasn't alive when the telecom dinosaurs roamed the planet. So I'm about as clueless. Was the study you were a part of ever printed somewhere, like the HBR or WSJ?

Re: IBM's Asshole Test

#444

Post by JadeNB »

krono wrote: post #96
f0e4c2f7 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This story strikes me as pretty funny. As if he might say "damn, I was hoping you knew. We've been working on this one for weeks!"

Near the beginning of a class, Professor Neyman wrote two problems on the blackboard. Dantzig arrived late and assumed that they were a homework assignment. According to Dantzig, they "seemed to be a little harder than usual", but a few days later he handed in completed solutions for both problems, still believing that they were an assignment that was overdue. Six weeks later, an excited Neyman eagerly told him that…

Carlo Beenakker answered on MathOverflow (https://mathoverflow.net/a/298601):

> The two problems that Dantzig solved were eventually published in: On the Non-Existence of Tests of "Student's" Hypothesis Having Power Functions Independent of σ (1940) and in On the Fundamental Lemma of Neyman and Pearson (1951).

Re: IBM's Asshole Test

#445

Post by m463 »

inopinatus wrote: post #166

When I interviewed with AWS, half the loop interviews were with remote staff. I was shown to a videoconferencing room and asked to wait. There was a pile of VC equipment but it wasn't connected. With five minutes before we were due to start, I decided this was part of the interview and plugged stuff in myself, powered it on, and clicked through some boot-time screens, guessing at the right inputs. A few minutes later…

Would be a good way (mua haa haa!) to ensure fewer candidates are interviewed after you.

Re: IBM's Asshole Test

#446

Post by onion2k »

reificator wrote: post #397
onion2k wrote: post #394

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that you're thinking in absolutes. That's not how life works. The driver doean't need to be a formal part of the hiring process that everyone rigorously goes through. There's variation and difference for every candidate. That's just because hiring is a human process. In this case just knowing the driver well enough to ask them "Was that person nice to you?" when they drop a candidate off gets you anoth…

> a positive "they treated me like a human being" or a negative "no, they were rude" That's the whole range eh?

Yes. Anything else wouls go against the sworn secret oath that every taxi driver lives by.

Re: IBM's Asshole Test

#447

Post by JadeNB »

imglorp wrote: post #152
Victerius wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I started reading my brain went straight to Von Neumann. Now I really want to read a fanfic about a story where John Von Neumann is invited to a Google interview.

Maybe not Von Neumann at google, but how about Feynman at Microsoft? https://sellsbrothers.com/12395

> The people authorized to open manhole covers could easily be trained to do it safely.

Funny as it is, I would like to think that someone famous for his role in the investigation of the Challenger disaster would never flippantly say that a dangerous situation doesn't matter because "people … could easily be trained to do it safely." The fact that people can be trained to do something properly doesn't mean that trained people won't still sometimes do it improperly.

Re: IBM's Asshole Test

#448

Post by m463 »

dkarl wrote: post #153

It's funny, the way we used to do coding interviews was to systematically ramp up the difficulty of the problem until the candidate struggled. The reasoning was that with easy problems, a lot of candidates could just write the solution on the whiteboard. You don't learn much about a candidate that way. But if you give them a problem they have to think about, and ask them to think out loud, you learn what problem-solv…

I had a set of problems increasing in difficulty. Most candidates only solved (or had seen) one or two, but some sailed past those to increasing difficulty problems.

Re: IBM's Asshole Test

#449

Post by m463 »

Dracophoenix wrote: post #374
zw123456 wrote: post #330

OMG, PTSD is kicking in for me here. I was in a similar program way way back in the 1970's early 1980's with Ma Bell. I was working at Bell Labs after getting my Masters in EE and they put me in what they called the JET program (Junior Executive Training). First off, I never wanted to be an Executive, whatever that is. I wanted to do research, but when you are young and right out of school and they hit you with that…

What were the qualities need for an executive then?

The actual test was to see how they dealt with frequent airline travel.

Re: IBM's Asshole Test

#450

Post by wfme »

Spooky23 wrote: post #398
wfme wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It’s a token of appreciation. When a salesman gives you a squeeze ball or a bottle of scotch, it’s not a “bribe”. It’s an artifact that provides an excuse to talk, and perhaps anchor the conversation positively. Likewise, the store policy of providing a discount is intended leave you with a positive memory that reinforces your action. “Wow. I made a mistake, caught it, and the nice lady at the counter thanked me and…

Absolutely agree. I'm not trying to say that everyone should start stealing things because it's _cheaper_, just that the "reward" of doing the right thing is not particularly compelling if someone is already partaking in the bad behaviour.
Post reply on HN