3 ms·

That's rather interesting. I've actually found that reading code on someone's github or checking out their personal website is great for ruling in/out candidate

That's rather interesting. I've actually found that reading code on someone's github or checking out their personal website is great for ruling in/out candidates. When they share their github or website, I'll view the source on the website to see how they organized stuff or if they did literally copy/paste a template. With GitHub, it gives some talking points. So for example, if they have some Angular code on their GitHub and also list it as a competency on their resume I'll ask them about the project. Granted, I agree that this screener really did a poor job at seeing through this candidate's smoke screen but still, I find GitHub and personal websites useful in the interview process. It does not take away the actual parts you mentioned about walking through a problem during the interview, or talking about real situations on the job and how they would approach finding a solution.

segmondy 10y ago
do you search for code theft? 80% of the code submitted for my interviews is 100% copy and pasted. When they put in effort, they remove the comments and rename the variable.
- brogrammernot 10y ago
  If the code is "beyond" what I would expect to see at the candidate's level, yes. It's merely a talking point, it becomes super clear if someone has copied/pasted code.
cr0sh 10y ago
Here's a question - to you and anyone else who cares to respond: I like to treat my github in a certain manner, and maybe I should change that. Currently, what I have on my github is some repos that are all mine - but I also have a bunch more repos that are forks of other repos. I do this (fork other repos) because I like the repo, and some of them might be really old (that is, they haven't been changes in months or years - low commit frequency or such). So - a fork for me is kinda like "save it for later", in case the original repo goes away. Plus, IIRC, if the original repo does get updated, I'll be notified and I can pull down the changes into my repo (my only other option would be to download a zip of the master branch - but then if it did change, I wouldn't know). Should I not do this? I mean, those forked repos are clearly labeled as forks from the original repo, and I have made it clear in the past that "only these repos are mine exclusively" - but should I not do this? Should I instead have a separate github just for those kinds of forks, and keep my personal repo for only my own stuff? I'm just wondering how confusing this really is for prospective employers or others - I don't want them thinking that repos x/y/z are mine when they aren't, and miss the repos that actually are mine. It's too bad that there isn't an option to segregate this better on github, and only show your repos by default. Maybe I need to review my settings...
- brogrammernot 10y ago
  Wouldn't change a thing. No sane interviewer would think you're claiming your fork of a repo is your own code. Not to mention it's mostly used as a talking point for me, so if I did make that mistake I'd be fine when you said it was a fork. That's pretty interesting to me as well, so it opens up an avenue to have a conversation about why you liked that project, why you want to emulate it etc

segmondy 10y ago

do you search for code theft? 80% of the code submitted for my interviews is 100% copy and pasted. When they put in effort, they remove the comments and rename the variable.

brogrammernot 10y ago
If the code is "beyond" what I would expect to see at the candidate's level, yes. It's merely a talking point, it becomes super clear if someone has copied/pasted code.

cr0sh 10y ago

Here's a question - to you and anyone else who cares to respond: I like to treat my github in a certain manner, and maybe I should change that. Currently, what I have on my github is some repos that are all mine - but I also have a bunch more repos that are forks of other repos. I do this (fork other repos) because I like the repo, and some of them might be really old (that is, they haven't been changes in months or years - low commit frequency or such). So - a fork for me is kinda like "save it for later", in case the original repo goes away. Plus, IIRC, if the original repo does get updated, I'll be notified and I can pull down the changes into my repo (my only other option would be to download a zip of the master branch - but then if it did change, I wouldn't know). Should I not do this? I mean, those forked repos are clearly labeled as forks from the original repo, and I have made it clear in the past that "only these repos are mine exclusively" - but should I not do this? Should I instead have a separate github just for those kinds of forks, and keep my personal repo for only my own stuff? I'm just wondering how confusing this really is for prospective employers or others - I don't want them thinking that repos x/y/z are mine when they aren't, and miss the repos that actually are mine. It's too bad that there isn't an option to segregate this better on github, and only show your repos by default. Maybe I need to review my settings...

brogrammernot 10y ago
Wouldn't change a thing. No sane interviewer would think you're claiming your fork of a repo is your own code. Not to mention it's mostly used as a talking point for me, so if I did make that mistake I'd be fine when you said it was a fork. That's pretty interesting to me as well, so it opens up an avenue to have a conversation about why you liked that project, why you want to emulate it etc