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

Rant HN: I hate hackerrank

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 155 posts

Re: Rant HN: I hate hackerrank

#61

Post by erichurkman »

maxaf wrote: post #22

I hire engineers for a living, and find intellectually dishonest any interview practice I wouldn't enjoy myself. Paper coding, whiteboard coding, brain teasers, and algorithmic beatdowns are out. Representative take-home work samples and conversational problem solving are in. My candidates are told throughout the process that what we're looking for is a demonstration of how technical collaboration might work if we we…

Having a friendly interview process, to us, is a competitive advantage. As is not requiring multiple onsite interviews, too many phone calls, and even making the onsite interview not take all day (we try to wrap up by 1pm unless a candidate is shadowing an engineer for a day, which we typically do for more senior hires). Having a concise interview process often lets us get offers out the door while candidates are still navigating 'Round 3' and 'Coffee with a lead engineer' and other nonsense with the bigger companies.

Re: Rant HN: I hate hackerrank

#62

Post by bostik »

k2xl wrote: post #40

Sort of surprised to see most of the comments on here actually defending the companies that put so much weight on these types of tests. I think many people assume that interviewers are looking for "thought process" but from my experience as a hiring manager for 6 years, in reality you'll find that most are just looking to "gotch-ya" the candidate. Many interviewers seem to enjoy making a candidate "sweat" as some sou…

> I think many people assume that interviewers are looking for "thought process" but from my experience as a hiring manager for 6 years, in reality you'll find that most are just looking to "gotch-ya" the candidate. Many interviewers seem to enjoy making a candidate "sweat" as some source of pride.

What you describe is a horrible approach to interviewing, and points towards dysfunction more than anything else.

In my opinion, the second most appealing non-technical character trait for an engineer is empathy. (Curiosity being #1.) If you have an interviewer who goes on a power trip and actively tries to abuse a candidate, what does that tell you about their company?

Everything is PR, and how we interview engineers tells a lot about how we deal with each other. Would you like to work in a place where being nasty is considered normal - or even desirable?

Re: Rant HN: I hate hackerrank

#63

Post by jacques_chester »

0xmohit wrote: post #54
jacques_chester wrote: post #46

Here's how I was assessed for my job at Pivotal: 1. I did a simple tech screen (the RPI). 1 hour. My interviewer had a laptop and asked me questions about what to do next in the scenario. 2. Hey, come pair with this engineer on this real code on a real project on a real task. 3. How about lunch? 4. Hey, let's have you pair with this other engineer on real code on a real project on a real task. 5. Get offered a job on…

It's also a fantastic way to see how one thinks, one's problem solving approach, debugging skills and the like.

It is!

I hasten to add that it isn't perfect. We hire across the intro-extraversion spectrum, but there's an ongoing concern that we're biased towards extraverts. Especially in Labs, which is the consulting wing.

Another problem is that many candidates are just plain nervous. We do our best to set people at ease and to be upfront that there's no right or wrong or trick answers. But interviewing is just scary. I expected to fail and so felt no pressure -- had I felt that more was on the line, maybe I'd have done worse.

The third -- this is a very common negative opinion -- is the argument that we don't give candidates a fair opportunity to show their expertise.

We will usually try to assign one project where their résumé claims expertise and another one that they're unfamiliar with. The former to take a sounding of their expertise, the second to get a feeling for their approach to the unknown.

It's not always possible to do this, simply because it's a vast field and candidates come with very varied backgrounds. And those candidates who are declined often feel that we've denied them a fair chance by throwing them into an unfamiliar technology.

These are all fair criticisms. My best answer is: we are not trying to trick or exclude anyone upfront. Ultimately the hiring decision is made by future peers, so we want to be fair but firm.

Hiring is just hard.

Re: Rant HN: I hate hackerrank

#64

Post by 0xmohit »

EliRivers wrote: post #11

As an aside, I also dislike hackerrank; for me, it's the sheer ham-fisted ineptitude of some of the alleged learning exercises. Look at this mess: https://www.hackerrank.com/challenges/preprocessor-solution This purports to be teaching use of the preprocessor. It's horrific. It's someone's amusing "look at how you can create your own programming language by abusing the preprocessor" mess; fair enough, it's always fun…

  One day I'll have to work with people who learned from
  this (and others like it), and it will be a long painful road
  to help them unlearn.
Quoting from the link you've mentioned:

  #define add(a, b) a + b
I couldn't agree with you more.

--

To elaborate:

  add(1, 8) * add(5, 1)
wouldn't yield 9 * 6 = 54, but

  1 + 8 * 5 + 1
which is 42. One might say that it's correct, since it's the Answer to the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe and Everything.

Re: Rant HN: I hate hackerrank

#65

Post by jacques_chester »

matthewowen wrote: post #56
jacques_chester wrote: post #46

Here's how I was assessed for my job at Pivotal: 1. I did a simple tech screen (the RPI). 1 hour. My interviewer had a laptop and asked me questions about what to do next in the scenario. 2. Hey, come pair with this engineer on this real code on a real project on a real task. 3. How about lunch? 4. Hey, let's have you pair with this other engineer on real code on a real project on a real task. 5. Get offered a job on…

Pairing for interviews is a good idea if you pair. But it's not a good idea if you don't: I don't like pairing, and I don't really want to work somewhere where it's a big part of what they do. I won't perform as well in an interview pairing, which ksbisfil info of you do pair, irrelevant if not.

Engineers like yourself, who don't want to pair, self-select out before applying.

Which is fine! There's plenty of variety in this industry to find preferred practices, peers and environment.

Re: Rant HN: I hate hackerrank

#66

Post by radley »

tony wrote: post #31

For their own expedience. It's an employer's market. It costs 2.5k/yr to keep an SO posting up and get thousands of resumes in your inbox. I'd also say a fair share of those in Who's Hiring on HN aren't in dire need of filling seats, but just trying to see how far people with fling themselves through the mazes. Blissfully unaware they're not the only startup and have no way of offering the stability of a large compan…

The interview + take home test works as the best initial filter. You know their history and can see their work and code.

Re: Rant HN: I hate hackerrank

#67

Post by retreatguru »

erichurkman wrote: post #61
maxaf wrote: post #22

I hire engineers for a living, and find intellectually dishonest any interview practice I wouldn't enjoy myself. Paper coding, whiteboard coding, brain teasers, and algorithmic beatdowns are out. Representative take-home work samples and conversational problem solving are in. My candidates are told throughout the process that what we're looking for is a demonstration of how technical collaboration might work if we we…

Having a friendly interview process, to us, is a competitive advantage. As is not requiring multiple onsite interviews, too many phone calls, and even making the onsite interview not take all day (we try to wrap up by 1pm unless a candidate is shadowing an engineer for a day, which we typically do for more senior hires). Having a concise interview process often lets us get offers out the door while candidates are sti…

I wanted to use and like hackerrank as a hiring tool but found the questions had nothing to do with what devs do every day - mainly solving business problems in elegant ways. I even contacted them and told them so but did not get much response.

I treat interviews more like going out for coffee and often do just that. I like to understand what people are passionate about both in tech and personally.

Re: Rant HN: I hate hackerrank

#68

Post by raverbashing »

nine_k wrote: post #13

Went through this a couple times lately. No pain. And the battery of automated tests helpfully written for you saves a lot of time. If the companies you interview with choose problems you don't find relevant, it may be their fault, not HackerRank's. Or even not a fault: they have to screen out a number of applicants who are good at boasting but can't actually code. You obviously can. It can be a bit boring, bit it ge…

Yes, the test itself is fine, however the issues I've seen:

- Hidden tests/metrics that also get evaluated

- Companies with an exaggerated sense of self-importance and unrealistic expectation of results

This is a test, you don't have the feedback that you have on a company (code reviews/talking to a colleague/better understanding of the conditions/real data tests/etc). Don't expect me to guess your conditions.

Also, I can't cover all points in the time you give me, I'm focusing on making the thing work, other stuff is secondary.

Re: Rant HN: I hate hackerrank

#69

Post by k2xl »

bostik wrote: post #62
k2xl wrote: post #40

Sort of surprised to see most of the comments on here actually defending the companies that put so much weight on these types of tests. I think many people assume that interviewers are looking for "thought process" but from my experience as a hiring manager for 6 years, in reality you'll find that most are just looking to "gotch-ya" the candidate. Many interviewers seem to enjoy making a candidate "sweat" as some sou…

> I think many people assume that interviewers are looking for "thought process" but from my experience as a hiring manager for 6 years, in reality you'll find that most are just looking to "gotch-ya" the candidate. Many interviewers seem to enjoy making a candidate "sweat" as some source of pride. What you describe is a horrible approach to interviewing, and points towards dysfunction more than anything else. In my…

> Everything is PR, and how we interview engineers tells a lot about how we deal with each other. Would you like to work in a place where being nasty is considered normal - or even desirable?

Couldn't agree more. I tell my employees this religiously.

I would also say that the 'power trip' isn't a boolean characteristic. There are different levels for different employees at companies. I think most of us have probably experienced or known those who tends to be on one side of the scale or the other.

Re: Rant HN: I hate hackerrank

#70

Post by newjobseeker »

I'm going through this right now. I've taken some time (1+ years) off and do admit to being rusty. However, I've dedicated time to studying and I'm not getting past some technical phone screens because of these algorithms-heavy questions. I do well enough on them yet are passed over. I thought the market was "hot" and this would be relatively straightforward, but it has been anything but easy. I'm also starting to wonder if there are other factors at play (ageism, female).
Post reply on HN