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

One Hour Hire - Hacking Engineer Interviews

rocketship.instacart.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 77 posts

Re: One Hour Hire - Hacking Engineer Interviews

#51

Post by EdwardDiego »

buckbova wrote: post #42
ojbyrne wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Implementing a linked list" is essentially measuring 1 of 2 things: 1. How long it has been since you graduated from college. The further away the less likely you will remember how to do it, because you will never do it after college. or 2. How often you have interviewed for other positions, because that is the exception to 1.

I'm over 10 years out of college. Last time I implemented a linked list was probably in my second year of a CS degree. I still remember and will probably never forget how to at least psuedo-code a linked list. But you are right, I have never implemented it after college. However knowledge of pointers, lists and b-trees have been very helpful multiple times throughout my career.

> However knowledge of pointers, lists and b-trees have been very helpful multiple times throughout my career.

Indeed. And such glorious moments they are when choosing the right data structure drastically improves performance.

However, if I were interviewing for a Rails developer position, the last thing I'd anticipate having to bone up on is algorithms and data-structures. I'd be expecting to be asked about... well, doing stuff in Ruby on Rails.

Re: One Hour Hire - Hacking Engineer Interviews

#52

Post by apoorvamehta »

MattRogish wrote: post #22

There's no shared risk here, it's all on the candidate. Bad form. Only something along the commitment of the 0.5-1hr "weed out" question can/should be done remotely. If you're going to require people to do ~7 hrs of tests, that had better be at the office, pairing, with other folks (and at least give them a free breakfast/lunch/dinner!). 7 hrs while working a 40hr (or more!) week is a pretty hefty commitment, and I s…

Our process 'weeds out' candidates as soon as we know that its not a good fit. This in reality saves the candidate ( who may be interviewing at other places as well as working like you mentioned ) as well as our time. The 7 hour number keeps coming up, and seems like a lot, but very few candidates actually spend that much time. And, most of those are actually hired.

We've tried conversations as well, but unfortunately, it is very difficult to objectively measure them into what will make the candidate successful at the company (interested to learn how you do it).

Re: One Hour Hire - Hacking Engineer Interviews

#53

Post by aryastark »

te_chris wrote: post #46

You know the worst part about this? Once you've got through all that shit, you're working on a shopping cart.

Always. About a year into the job you realize "solve challenging problems" part of the ad really just meant you're going to battle self-inflicted organizational and maintenance stupidity and office politics.

Everyone wants rockstars. But very few companies are worthy.

Re: One Hour Hire - Hacking Engineer Interviews

#55

Post by rhizome »

nonchalance wrote: post #24

The biggest waste of time is that candidates have to demonstrate general competency to every company he or she is considering. It's a waste of engineering resources checking every candidate and a waste of time for the candidates. Is there a way to unify that across companies (other than by creating a certification scheme)? Is there a way to standardize the code sample procedure?

Most, if not all, of these companies do not articulate what "the bar" is that candidates have to meet, or at least do not do so publicly or as part of the job req, so no, I don't think there is currently a way to unify that across companies. "The bar" is largely a euphemism for an information asymmetry in a company's hiring.

Re: One Hour Hire - Hacking Engineer Interviews

#56

Post by trailnay »

yeukhon wrote: post #23
trailnay wrote: post #3

"unable to implement a simple linked list" "Vet the technical competency of full stack rails engineers..." because there are linked lists in ruby? rolleyes 3 hrs of backend/algo testing? rolleyes 4 hrs of frontend? rolleyes I hope they enjoyed tooting their own horn, yet another place I know to avoid bothering to interview at.

EDIT Sorry. If you can't implement linked list and think that first item is too much for an interview, HN is not the place to swing around. Keep downvoting lol. TL; DR version: It isn't fair to throw a company out of a windows because they are serious about their hiring process. It totally depends on their company's growth need! First bullet point is extremely fair but the rest aren't and I agree on that. Longer vers…

"Not the place to swing around"? Firstly, there's plenty of entrepreneurs here who don't code at all. Secondly, that's a really silly thing to say. Do you honestly think that you can't be a great Rails engineer without having fluency with linked lists off the top of your head in an interview type situation? I can think of a thousand questions that would give me a much more accurate idea of how good a candidate would be as a web developer and the day to day issues they would face.

Re: One Hour Hire - Hacking Engineer Interviews

#57

Post by rhizome »

minimaxir wrote: post #20
apoorvamehta wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One day for a several year investment seems pretty logical to us.

Employment is a two-way street, especially for someone in-demand as a Rails engineer.

Something about this post tells me that there is not actually that high of a demand, and that there may actually be a glut.

Re: One Hour Hire - Hacking Engineer Interviews

#58

Post by rhizome »

shiftb wrote: post #11
elbear wrote: post #7

Maybe it works for them, but I don't find any motivation to work on test project that exist only for their own sake. I mean, if the test project is actually a part of the real project that I would be working, then that's okay. But to build something with made up requirements puts me off.

The challenges are all real projects that we've already built (and thus have a baseline for). We don't agree with brainteaser interviews. Having someone build a made up project would be just as bad as a brainteaser. We wouldn't do that to a candidate.

What's the difference between a brainteaser and a problem you've already solved?

Re: One Hour Hire - Hacking Engineer Interviews

#59

Post by rhizome »

shiftb wrote: post #50
alexatkeplar wrote: post #40

This is a powerful example of how (some) VC-backed companies fall into the trap of optimizing for hiring velocity rather than product-market fit.

On the contrary, we're very particular about hiring. We would rather go without an engineer than hire someone that will break the average team quality down.

So you're saying you have an actual number that indicates "average team quality?" Is this another way of saying "culture fit?"

Re: One Hour Hire - Hacking Engineer Interviews

#60

Post by Iftheshoefits »

rhizome wrote: post #58
shiftb wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The challenges are all real projects that we've already built (and thus have a baseline for). We don't agree with brainteaser interviews. Having someone build a made up project would be just as bad as a brainteaser. We wouldn't do that to a candidate.

What's the difference between a brainteaser and a problem you've already solved?

Their problems are special and important.
Post reply on HN