The rise of never-ending job interviews

Post by mongol » Mon, Aug 02, 2021, 7:37 PM UTC

Joker_vD wrote: post #543

mongol wrote: post #511

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The inode question is tricky. It is certainly not something an employer should take for granted you have memorized. But the answer can be reached by reasoning, at least if you know something about filesystems and the concept of hard links. Which you probably do if you have read the "ln" man page. It is still a pretty poor question, I remember getting a similar kind of question when I passed through the (at the time,…

Well, maybe it'd be better called "aptitude test": if you don't know that gasoline lighter than water that means you've never handled it manually, so better not put you into an automechanic position.

Post by machinevision » Mon, Aug 02, 2021, 7:48 PM UTC

LAC-Tech wrote: post #33

sp332 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Companies don't want to do job training anymore. Instead of a general background and attitude check, they need to know if the candidate has all of the individual skills that will be used on the job.

This a hundred times over. I still remember in 2020 multiple places asking me "I see you've used .NET core, what *version* have you used?". I had a kind of career crisis/breakdown, where I realised no one gave a shit about anything except my utility as a walking set of tech keywords. Accepting that it wasn't working for me was one of the best things I've done for my career.

Post by actually_a_dog » Mon, Aug 02, 2021, 8:03 PM UTC

ricardobayes wrote: post #900

crispyambulance wrote: post #628

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The experiences that people describe here just confirm something that many of us has learned a long time ago: NOBODY HAS "FIGURED OUT" HIRING ! Not Google, not Apple, no one. Sure, some places (and individual interviewers) are better at it than others. But at the end of the day, hiring is a deeply subjective process with lots of error and uncertainty built into it's nature. The subjectivity is intrinsic. Places like…

we have, we don't have technical interviews anymore, just a 'cultural fit' discussion. coding has become so trivial anyone with a brain can piece together snippets from stackoverflow. do yourself a favor and if all you do is crud operations in a web app, don´t even bother with tech rounds.

Post by wheelinsupial » Mon, Aug 02, 2021, 8:10 PM UTC

laurent92 wrote: post #582

bb88 wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's funny is that I specifically remember a conference where some library that a google employee wrote was terrible. The one google developer talking about it, disavowed any responsibility of it. Whatever metrics that google is using in their interviews have probably become worthless in the past decade as people game the system.

In my startup I interviewed a 48 years old senior Java programmer with excellent resume, who took 1hr to write a String.contains(), it only worked for the requested 4 letters, didn’t work if a letter was repeated twice, and didn’t work with Chinese characters. At least it had the JUnit. I asked an employee to do it too and he made his code pass the JUnit in 6 minutes. The candidate hated the interview, claiming it wa…

Post by dilyevsky » Mon, Aug 02, 2021, 8:18 PM UTC

mbit8 wrote: post #375

dilyevsky wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These numbers are misleading af. Most of those applications are just spam, not really relevant and never get read by any human. I’ve done ~150 interviews for backend roles at google and based on my experience 4 years ago if you make it to onsite you have 5-10% of getting an offer

if you get onsite at most companies for an experienced position the chance is rather 50% to get hired. if i would know the chance is only 5 % i would decline the onsite interview at google.