6 ms·

I'd quit the moment I was told they need to have something more than just a "share your desktop". The hell is this, really...

by konart 10y ago

nkozyra 10y ago
It's an general aptitude test. If someone cheats they move forward when perhaps they shouldn't and they waste Amazon's time. ProctorU does similar things for universities. I've taken a few, they're not always this intrusive, but I understand the sentiment. People cheat. It's hard to stop that and even harder to do remotely.
- geofft 10y ago
  So it filters for only the good cheaters, then. To be fair, those people are very likely to be successful!
- mikeash 10y ago
  Seems like the proper way to handle this would be to have the test taker go somewhere with a proper test taking environment. If you don't want them to come on sit, then I'm sure there are local facilities they could contract to handle it. Attempting to take over a person's own computer in order to prevent cheating on a test is simultaneously an egregious invasion of privacy and completely insecure. Are we really supposed to believe that you wouldn't be able to hide some cheating materials from your own webcam?
  - nkozyra 10y ago
    > Seems like the proper way to handle this would be to have the test taker go somewhere with a proper test taking environment. If you don't want them to come on sit, then I'm sure there are local facilities they could contract to handle it. I'm certain it's more expensive for the company, though. And some candidates don't have nearby access to this.
    - rewrew 10y ago
      There a so many locations that almost all do -- certainly much easier than any local interview location.
      - nkozyra 10y ago
        But easier and cheaper than ProctorU? That's the main sell.
        mikeash 10y ago
        Doing things badly is usually easier and cheaper than doing them properly.
  - dom0 10y ago
    Mensa International tests work similar to this, ie. they rent a room in a VHS or university for a couple hours to conduct the tests.
    - mikeash 10y ago
      The FAA's written exam for pilots is similar, they have certified testing centers which can administer it. That's what made me think of this approach. Looking around a bit, it looks like dedicated testing centers are fairly common.
  - Broken_Hippo 10y ago
    I recently had this a version of this with test taking - As part of immigration, I had to complete civics and language learning courses. Both had tests to take to complete the training. The tests were held at the schools, all online. Purses, bags, jackets, electronics and so forth were left at the front of the room. Paper and pencils were provided in the computer labs, which were recorded and inspected for signs of cheating. Humans were at the site, but video wouldn't have been out of the question either. It wouldn't seem too much to be able to rent a local school's computer lab for these sorts of purposes, for a small fee. And the internet and security on these is already tax-payer funded. This should put test taking environments well within reach of most people.
  - rewrew 10y ago
    Exactly. There are proctored testing labs worldwide -- there is absolutely no reason for Amazon not to handle it this way if they really feel the proctoring is necessary. Someone at Amazon just didn't do their job properly.
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
- konart 10y ago
  What is cheating in this situation? When we are talking about university exams - yes, you can cheat by using materials you are not allowed to. As a software developer - I alwasy kind of cheat. I use Stackoverflow and infinite google search abilities :)
  - FungalRaincloud 10y ago
    I consider cheating to be part of my job. I look up things I've done a dozen times before, if I haven't done them in a few weeks. I'll often ask google how to do something, then while it's loading the results, start writing the code that does that thing. A more valuable test, in my eyes, is how well someone CAN cheat in the interview. I want to hear someone say "you know, I've never actually heard that question before, let me see if anyone's talking about it on StackOverflow." Admitting you don't know the answer, and coming up with a way to get the answer is far more important a skill, to me, than blind recall. I've said "I don't know" in an interview, and while getting the words out took some effort, it showed the interviewer that I could admit to not knowing, and started a dialog between me and the interviewer, which gave him an idea of how I think about new problems.
  - nkozyra 10y ago
    You can consider this tantamount to a blackboard exercise. In all likelihood they're looking for basic algorithm stuff. In that instance, in your daily job you wouldn't even cheat by looking it up, you'd just use a library. I would assume that they value people who understand how these things work rather than just being able to implement it. After all, you can teach someone basic Python and how to use Scipy in a couple of hours, but does that make them a data scientist? Anyway my point is lots of companies have programming exercises/tests, and I'm not aware of too many that let you just look stuff up while you're doing them. Debate the merits of that, but it's common enough that seeing it in this platform shouldn't feel totally shocking.
r1k 10y ago
He could just have set up a separate user account.
- dclowd9901 10y ago
  It sounds like he didn't know it would've been this intrusive. I had no idea personally and I know a lot of people who have worked at Amazon.
  - skaul 10y ago
    Exactly. I respect Amazon as a company, and wanted to work there at the time. Wasn't quite expecting this.
jmcdiesel 10y ago
The moment they wanted access to my screen... I would have terminated it. I'm not a privacy nut, but I am a respect nut... and if your level of respect for your engineers allows you to enforce such a ridiculous policy of "testing" in the interview process, well, you don't have much respect for the engineers... or their time, or their own privacy (on their own machine). I wont work for a company who installs "screen watching" software on your machine. I wont work for a company who middle-man's the SSL cert. I wont work for a company who drug tests. (I smoke MJ, but a lot of companies state MJ doesnt fail, but I still refuse to take a drug test, its principle) We aren't cattle. When you're treated as such in the interview process, you can strongly infer that you will be treated as such in your position.
- konart 10y ago
  Well, screen sharing is okay (even though I'd prefere some 3rd party service with real-life code editing) and most OS has this kind of feature by default. Or via something like Skype (some other IM softwar has similar features too). My main 'concern' was about "The proctor then proceeded to shut down all my running applications for me" - the fuck is this? Pardon my language.
  - hocuspocus 10y ago
    I've had one interview using Skype screen sharing where I had to import a toy project in my IDE and deal with some more "real-life" kind of tasks, and it was a good experience. Collabedit and the like are a bit limiting outside of Google-style algo questions. I'd never install something like LogMeIn/TeamViewer though.
  - jmcdiesel 10y ago
    Showing my screen is one thing... I prefer a collabedit or something similar... I work on a MacOS computer... so even when apps are closed, notifications still show. I set my messages notifications to show the full message... including images... so even with Messages closed, if my wife SMS's me, it shows on my screen. I dont want to have to go shut off notifications for an interview process... and i shouldnt have to. There are plenty of tools to share the code view in many IDEs.. there are sites and services dedicated to this. To have access to my entire desktop, INCLUDING control of my mouse/keyboard and installing software... I would have a hard time telling them not to go fuck themselves... because the level of disrespect in treating an adult like a child student is so high its painful...
FungalRaincloud 10y ago
To be honest, my exact reaction to something like this would be to tell the recruiter the only way it was happening was in a virtual machine, with no camera or mic access. I'll happily do a video interview, but I'm not going to be given a test like that under such invasive, low trust circumstances. Either you trust me not to cheat, or you don't trust me enough to give me the position. I'm also a bit against tests of this sort, beyond just the privacy issue - in the real world, if you're not looking up things you're unsure of, you're making a mistake. Denying someone even written resources seems like setting them up for failure. But the privacy issue is a big one, and would likely cause me to quit before even allowing access to my machine.
- konart 10y ago
  >you don't trust me enough to give me the position. This. Why would I want to work in a company that labels me as a some sort of cheater before proven otherwise?
amyjess 10y ago
I would have quit the moment that either a) they asked me to turn on a camera inside my house or b) they asked me to give them access to my computer. I'm a pretty private person, and giving anyone access to either of these is a dealbreaker. Hell, I don't even let my friends in my house, much less an employer. One of the last times I dealt with a recruiter, he wanted me to have a Skype interview with him before he passes my contact information on to the employer (for a job I really didn't want, but I was unemployed so I didn't have a choice if I didn't want to lose my unemployment). I tried to argue him out of it, and I ended up doing the interview in my backyard because there's no way in hell I'd ever turn a camera on in my house.
- dom0 10y ago
  That seems overall sensible to me. I don't have any cameras* in the rooms I stay/work/sleep, and made sure that things like microphones are really only active when I want them to (eg. the mic line on my VoIP phone is hard-wired to the big, red indicator light on it). I feel very uncomfortable when I feel watched/listened to, and with digital devices there is no easy way to discern "could watch/listen" and "does watch/listen", so restrictions need to be placed in the real world, not in the world of bits and bytes... * Actually I do have one-or-the-other (D)SLR, but these are "dumb", not networked, and can positively not take pictures without somebody noticing - clack.

I'd quit the moment I was told they need to have something more than just a "share your desktop". The hell is this, really...

by konart 10y ago

I'd quit the moment I was told they need to have something more than just a "share your desktop". The hell is this, really...

nkozyra 10y ago

It's an general aptitude test. If someone cheats they move forward when perhaps they shouldn't and they waste Amazon's time. ProctorU does similar things for universities. I've taken a few, they're not always this intrusive, but I understand the sentiment. People cheat. It's hard to stop that and even harder to do remotely.

geofft 10y ago
So it filters for only the good cheaters, then. To be fair, those people are very likely to be successful!
mikeash 10y ago
Seems like the proper way to handle this would be to have the test taker go somewhere with a proper test taking environment. If you don't want them to come on sit, then I'm sure there are local facilities they could contract to handle it. Attempting to take over a person's own computer in order to prevent cheating on a test is simultaneously an egregious invasion of privacy and completely insecure. Are we really supposed to believe that you wouldn't be able to hide some cheating materials from your own webcam?
- nkozyra 10y ago
  > Seems like the proper way to handle this would be to have the test taker go somewhere with a proper test taking environment. If you don't want them to come on sit, then I'm sure there are local facilities they could contract to handle it. I'm certain it's more expensive for the company, though. And some candidates don't have nearby access to this.
  - rewrew 10y ago
    There a so many locations that almost all do -- certainly much easier than any local interview location.
    - nkozyra 10y ago
      But easier and cheaper than ProctorU? That's the main sell.
      - mikeash 10y ago
        Doing things badly is usually easier and cheaper than doing them properly.
- dom0 10y ago
  Mensa International tests work similar to this, ie. they rent a room in a VHS or university for a couple hours to conduct the tests.
  - mikeash 10y ago
    The FAA's written exam for pilots is similar, they have certified testing centers which can administer it. That's what made me think of this approach. Looking around a bit, it looks like dedicated testing centers are fairly common.
- Broken_Hippo 10y ago
  I recently had this a version of this with test taking - As part of immigration, I had to complete civics and language learning courses. Both had tests to take to complete the training. The tests were held at the schools, all online. Purses, bags, jackets, electronics and so forth were left at the front of the room. Paper and pencils were provided in the computer labs, which were recorded and inspected for signs of cheating. Humans were at the site, but video wouldn't have been out of the question either. It wouldn't seem too much to be able to rent a local school's computer lab for these sorts of purposes, for a small fee. And the internet and security on these is already tax-payer funded. This should put test taking environments well within reach of most people.
- rewrew 10y ago
  Exactly. There are proctored testing labs worldwide -- there is absolutely no reason for Amazon not to handle it this way if they really feel the proctoring is necessary. Someone at Amazon just didn't do their job properly.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
konart 10y ago
What is cheating in this situation? When we are talking about university exams - yes, you can cheat by using materials you are not allowed to. As a software developer - I alwasy kind of cheat. I use Stackoverflow and infinite google search abilities :)
- FungalRaincloud 10y ago
  I consider cheating to be part of my job. I look up things I've done a dozen times before, if I haven't done them in a few weeks. I'll often ask google how to do something, then while it's loading the results, start writing the code that does that thing. A more valuable test, in my eyes, is how well someone CAN cheat in the interview. I want to hear someone say "you know, I've never actually heard that question before, let me see if anyone's talking about it on StackOverflow." Admitting you don't know the answer, and coming up with a way to get the answer is far more important a skill, to me, than blind recall. I've said "I don't know" in an interview, and while getting the words out took some effort, it showed the interviewer that I could admit to not knowing, and started a dialog between me and the interviewer, which gave him an idea of how I think about new problems.
- nkozyra 10y ago
  You can consider this tantamount to a blackboard exercise. In all likelihood they're looking for basic algorithm stuff. In that instance, in your daily job you wouldn't even cheat by looking it up, you'd just use a library. I would assume that they value people who understand how these things work rather than just being able to implement it. After all, you can teach someone basic Python and how to use Scipy in a couple of hours, but does that make them a data scientist? Anyway my point is lots of companies have programming exercises/tests, and I'm not aware of too many that let you just look stuff up while you're doing them. Debate the merits of that, but it's common enough that seeing it in this platform shouldn't feel totally shocking.

r1k 10y ago

He could just have set up a separate user account.

dclowd9901 10y ago
It sounds like he didn't know it would've been this intrusive. I had no idea personally and I know a lot of people who have worked at Amazon.
- skaul 10y ago
  Exactly. I respect Amazon as a company, and wanted to work there at the time. Wasn't quite expecting this.

jmcdiesel 10y ago

The moment they wanted access to my screen... I would have terminated it. I'm not a privacy nut, but I am a respect nut... and if your level of respect for your engineers allows you to enforce such a ridiculous policy of "testing" in the interview process, well, you don't have much respect for the engineers... or their time, or their own privacy (on their own machine). I wont work for a company who installs "screen watching" software on your machine. I wont work for a company who middle-man's the SSL cert. I wont work for a company who drug tests. (I smoke MJ, but a lot of companies state MJ doesnt fail, but I still refuse to take a drug test, its principle) We aren't cattle. When you're treated as such in the interview process, you can strongly infer that you will be treated as such in your position.

konart 10y ago
Well, screen sharing is okay (even though I'd prefere some 3rd party service with real-life code editing) and most OS has this kind of feature by default. Or via something like Skype (some other IM softwar has similar features too). My main 'concern' was about "The proctor then proceeded to shut down all my running applications for me" - the fuck is this? Pardon my language.
- hocuspocus 10y ago
  I've had one interview using Skype screen sharing where I had to import a toy project in my IDE and deal with some more "real-life" kind of tasks, and it was a good experience. Collabedit and the like are a bit limiting outside of Google-style algo questions. I'd never install something like LogMeIn/TeamViewer though.
- jmcdiesel 10y ago
  Showing my screen is one thing... I prefer a collabedit or something similar... I work on a MacOS computer... so even when apps are closed, notifications still show. I set my messages notifications to show the full message... including images... so even with Messages closed, if my wife SMS's me, it shows on my screen. I dont want to have to go shut off notifications for an interview process... and i shouldnt have to. There are plenty of tools to share the code view in many IDEs.. there are sites and services dedicated to this. To have access to my entire desktop, INCLUDING control of my mouse/keyboard and installing software... I would have a hard time telling them not to go fuck themselves... because the level of disrespect in treating an adult like a child student is so high its painful...

FungalRaincloud 10y ago

To be honest, my exact reaction to something like this would be to tell the recruiter the only way it was happening was in a virtual machine, with no camera or mic access. I'll happily do a video interview, but I'm not going to be given a test like that under such invasive, low trust circumstances. Either you trust me not to cheat, or you don't trust me enough to give me the position. I'm also a bit against tests of this sort, beyond just the privacy issue - in the real world, if you're not looking up things you're unsure of, you're making a mistake. Denying someone even written resources seems like setting them up for failure. But the privacy issue is a big one, and would likely cause me to quit before even allowing access to my machine.

konart 10y ago
>you don't trust me enough to give me the position. This. Why would I want to work in a company that labels me as a some sort of cheater before proven otherwise?

amyjess 10y ago

I would have quit the moment that either a) they asked me to turn on a camera inside my house or b) they asked me to give them access to my computer. I'm a pretty private person, and giving anyone access to either of these is a dealbreaker. Hell, I don't even let my friends in my house, much less an employer. One of the last times I dealt with a recruiter, he wanted me to have a Skype interview with him before he passes my contact information on to the employer (for a job I really didn't want, but I was unemployed so I didn't have a choice if I didn't want to lose my unemployment). I tried to argue him out of it, and I ended up doing the interview in my backyard because there's no way in hell I'd ever turn a camera on in my house.

dom0 10y ago
That seems overall sensible to me. I don't have any cameras* in the rooms I stay/work/sleep, and made sure that things like microphones are really only active when I want them to (eg. the mic line on my VoIP phone is hard-wired to the big, red indicator light on it). I feel very uncomfortable when I feel watched/listened to, and with digital devices there is no easy way to discern "could watch/listen" and "does watch/listen", so restrictions need to be placed in the real world, not in the world of bits and bytes... * Actually I do have one-or-the-other (D)SLR, but these are "dumb", not networked, and can positively not take pictures without somebody noticing - clack.