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

521–530 of 604 posts

Re: IBM's Asshole Test

#521

Post by Shocka1 »

bibinou wrote: post #475
reificator wrote: post #430

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So our range is somewhere around: - They were OK - They treated me like a human being - They were rude There's no room for "We had an interesting conversation" or "They gave me some good advice" or "I think I made a new friend"? Not even "They seemed like a good person"? The maximum is "They treated me like a human being" which is somehow above "They were OK"?

You must be fun in taxis.

I was thinking the same. I get the whole Hacker News "being a contrarian just to be a contrarian" thing, but this specific thread has gone much further than I thought it would.

Re: IBM's Asshole Test

#522

Post by greyhair »

I had an interview at a startup years ago (got the job) that was grueling, about six hours total, you met with six different teams of three people, from different disciplines across the company. It was sort of a good cop/bad cop thing. Not to aggressive, but just seeing if you were willing to admit you didn't know when you were asked a questions you didn't know (and there were lots I didn't know) and how you reacted in the situation. Some people don't handle 'not knowing', and try to BS their way through. Then, some are apologetic when they get called out, and some dig in. If you fell into that last group, you were not getting a job. If you fell into the second group, it was more of a sliding scale. Did you attempt to BS your way through multiple times across the multiple teams? Or did you realize, the first time you got called out, that it wouldn't work.

Re: IBM's Asshole Test

#523

Post by Shocka1 »

Spooky23 wrote: post #393
ALittleLight wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have seen several stories like this - the janitor, or secretary, or whoever is actually a trusted individual who is the true judge of character. To me, it seems implausible, more of a "feel good" story, but it also seems ill advised. Does the driver know he's part of the loop? Does the driver attend the debrief? Does the driver distinguish between great, normal, sub-normal, and bad social skills? What portion of je…

There’s an element of that, but you may not have seen real assholes in action. I have an admin, and people who treat her poorly pop up all of the time. She’s a trusted person who can wield whatever authority I have in many scenarios. Treating her poorly is rude and gross, but also self-destructive (hint: who actually manages the budget?). Plus, she won’t be an admin forever, and it’s a small world. I worked in retail…

Well said. I worked in retail in college as well and it sounds like we porbably have similar stories.

I've heard the comment multiple times that everyone should work in a restaurant at least once in their lives so they have a better understanding of what the employees go through. I tend to agree, and I would probably add retail in there as well.

Re: IBM's Asshole Test

#524

Post by DarylZero »

Ntrails wrote: post #501
DarylZero wrote: post #463

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A secret homophobe? Who said it was a secret? It's just as likely that it wasn't particularly secret. If a homophobe was working for HR (in 2022) they would hide it, even to the extent of making sure to hire some percentage gays no matter what they thought personally. > If your friend told you "man, my last customer was a jerk" you would distrust that? My personal friend? That's the standard we're expecting from a gi…

> That kind of thing is just gross, is my point. Observing how people behave around nominal subordinates is not a new trick or one that is gross. It's an interesting data point. This is unusual as rather than a receptionist or security guard, it is someone who doesn't work for the company. That you think it's impossible to trust someone without formal vetting is really interesting to me. It suggests that formal vetti…

It's not impossible to trust someone without formal vetting. It's irresponsible for a bureaucracy to trust someone without accountability.

Re: IBM's Asshole Test

#525

Post by bee_rider »

SilasX wrote: post #410
bee_rider wrote: post #346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sarcasm is a rhetorical trust-fall, I refuse to cheapen it by adding the /s.

Then you refuse to be a helpful contributor to discussions. Life is littered with cases where people thought they understood each other but didn’t. If there’s a chance you’ll be misinterpreted, you’re not communicating well and need to take steps to correct it, just out of general empathy for those who don’t have the exact same knowledge as you.

In conversations where optimizing the productivity of the discussion is a priority, I would not use sarcasm.

Re: IBM's Asshole Test

#526

Post by greyhair »

Fezzik wrote: post #462
ALittleLight wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have seen several stories like this - the janitor, or secretary, or whoever is actually a trusted individual who is the true judge of character. To me, it seems implausible, more of a "feel good" story, but it also seems ill advised. Does the driver know he's part of the loop? Does the driver attend the debrief? Does the driver distinguish between great, normal, sub-normal, and bad social skills? What portion of je…

Somewhat related to the anecdote you’re skeptical of: I was a law clerk for multiple years for a presiding judge and if you were a wise attorney rule #1 was be kind to the administrative staff at the courthouse - judges would find out if you were rude and while no-one was ever unethical, in my opinion, arrogant attorneys were definitely grilled more than polite ones. Kindness gets you a long way. And if you were a je…

You catch more flys with sugar than with vinegar.

Re: IBM's Asshole Test

#527

Post by kragen »

actually_a_dog wrote: post #502
kragen wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I'm working on a product I'm under time pressure: we need to get this feature done so we can move on to the next, or we need to fix this bug — possibly the site is down, or the customer's system is compromised, until we get it done. In an interview there's a sort of "pressure" but it's like the pressure of playing a video game or taking a math test or lifting weights: I'm working hard to do my best, but nothing…

You're either missing or conveniently ignoring the fact that almost all deadlines are artificial, and the only thing that happens when they get missed is that someone's quarterly plan doesn't match up to reality. I had a whole bit about that written up in my editor that I decided not to include, but, needless to say, reality disagrees with you here. Software projects are notoriously late, and people generally don't g…

Since you've interviewed candidates for programming jobs you know that being 99th percentile among them is pretty easy. Just being a programmer is enough. It's easy to exceed 10× zero.

It's true that many people get anxious about programming job interviews. Except in rare cases, it isn't really rational. But people get even more anxious about giving public talks, which, as you point out, often isn't rational either.

It's true that people sometimes create artificial time-pressure deadlines. Those people are manipulative schmucks who deserve no quarter. In reality, time to market is a huge competitive advantage, and when a business's site is down it generally loses money every minute; getting it back up allows the business to start making money again. Similar, but worse, when customer systems are broken because your software broke them.

When you're giving a talk at a conference, you're forming part of a community. You have a reputation in that community. That reputation can be good or bad. Having a bad reputation hurts you in myriad ways, even without anyone in the back row making a mark on your permanent record.

You're confusing your limited experience of reality with reality itself, and consequently you come off as dogmatic and defensive, which could limit your learning. I think everyone would benefit from incorporating more aspects of reality into their worldview.

Re: IBM's Asshole Test

#528

Post by DocTomoe »

chownie wrote: post #517
DocTomoe wrote: post #485

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And how would he know someone who was sitting in his taxi on their way to a job interview was gay?

We gay people do as a population have cultural "tells" which reveal our sexuality. To a random passerby probably not, but it doesnt take long for shibboleths to come out in a casual conversation. This actually happened in my workplace, I recognised a coworker as gay long before he told me, just from his vocabulary.

Sure - but are these clue tells likely to come up in what the interviewee considers a chance encounter - riding in a taxi - to a job interview (thus probably dressed in an uniform way), when their mind is likely on other things?

Also, wouldn't the taxi driver also have to know about these clues?

With all respect, I think the scenario "Taxi driver planted/used as an interview prescreen is openly anti-gay and sniffs them out." is a bit contrived.

Re: IBM's Asshole Test

#529

Post by greyhair »

Shocka1 wrote: post #523
Spooky23 wrote: post #393

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s an element of that, but you may not have seen real assholes in action. I have an admin, and people who treat her poorly pop up all of the time. She’s a trusted person who can wield whatever authority I have in many scenarios. Treating her poorly is rude and gross, but also self-destructive (hint: who actually manages the budget?). Plus, she won’t be an admin forever, and it’s a small world. I worked in retail…

Well said. I worked in retail in college as well and it sounds like we porbably have similar stories. I've heard the comment multiple times that everyone should work in a restaurant at least once in their lives so they have a better understanding of what the employees go through. I tend to agree, and I would probably add retail in there as well.

Everyone should work some form of retail job at least once in their life.

I was a motorcycle mechanic for six years before going to college. Some customers where a joy, you looked forward to seeing them, most were just average Joes that needed work done, and a very small few were arrogant self entitled jerks, but it was a job, and you had to deal with it.

Some of the nicest people I know have had retail experience in their life.

Re: IBM's Asshole Test

#530

Post by greyhair »

moistly wrote: post #438
wfme wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The parent you were responding to stated that people are not really rewarded for good behaviour after childhood. I'm not saying your deed was not a good one. I am saying that you are monetarily worse off for having gone back to pay and that feeling of having done the right thing, or the discount off the original price is hardly an example of good behaviour being rewarded, especially when you compare the reward for no…

What a pathetically sad way to view the world.

This is why I never have conversations with philosophy majors at parties. You are crawling through that same morass of specific straw man arguments that drive me nuts.
Post reply on HN