5 ms·

to be fair, there is now the benefit of a wealth of a) readily available info on what works/doesn't work and b) a lot more developers. Ok demand still outstrip

by gt2 9y ago

to be fair, there is now the benefit of a wealth of a) readily available info on what works/doesn't work and b) a lot more developers. Ok demand still outstrips supply probably but still, the best paying positions can afford to be choosey and demanding, no?

marcosdumay 9y ago
> no? Very likely, no. Unless those companies somehow got very good on your "a" point and told nobody, their more filters they add the biggest the likelihood of having one that is anti-correlated to competence. And just one such filter can be enough to cut all the extremely few great candidates.
- Clubber 9y ago
  It's amazing how risk averse companies are when good talent is so scarce. They need to take more risk on people, especially when it is so easy to fire people in the US. I wouldn't do a 5 hour interview, I don't care who the company is. I haven't had to do a cold interview (not referenced by an existing employee) since my first job out of college 20+ years ago. There is no way companies are going to find talent doing those long slog interviews, unless they pay 2x rates or something. Just the thought of 5 hour interviews makes my stomach queezy.
  - bitL 9y ago
    I like doing those onsite interviews at Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Apple etc. once a year to keep in touch with what is required these days. Why not testing yourself? In the worst case you'll get just rejected, not blacklisted or sent to a Gulag :D
    - Clubber 9y ago
      That's a good idea, just not for me. I read up on the criteria they ask about from time to time as a refresher. Last time I checked, Google had a study guide and it was really good coverage. Anything I don't know, I'll look up, then forget a few weeks later because I never use it. I also don't live in a city with any of those companies present (except for we have a Microsoft and Apple store). Finally, I'd rather have 5 hours of dental work done without anesthetic than sit in a stuffy conference room getting grilled about tech minutia for 5 hours. There's that. :)

by gt2 9y ago

marcosdumay 9y ago

> no? Very likely, no. Unless those companies somehow got very good on your "a" point and told nobody, their more filters they add the biggest the likelihood of having one that is anti-correlated to competence. And just one such filter can be enough to cut all the extremely few great candidates.

Clubber 9y ago
It's amazing how risk averse companies are when good talent is so scarce. They need to take more risk on people, especially when it is so easy to fire people in the US. I wouldn't do a 5 hour interview, I don't care who the company is. I haven't had to do a cold interview (not referenced by an existing employee) since my first job out of college 20+ years ago. There is no way companies are going to find talent doing those long slog interviews, unless they pay 2x rates or something. Just the thought of 5 hour interviews makes my stomach queezy.
- bitL 9y ago
  I like doing those onsite interviews at Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Apple etc. once a year to keep in touch with what is required these days. Why not testing yourself? In the worst case you'll get just rejected, not blacklisted or sent to a Gulag :D
  - Clubber 9y ago
    That's a good idea, just not for me. I read up on the criteria they ask about from time to time as a refresher. Last time I checked, Google had a study guide and it was really good coverage. Anything I don't know, I'll look up, then forget a few weeks later because I never use it. I also don't live in a city with any of those companies present (except for we have a Microsoft and Apple store). Finally, I'd rather have 5 hours of dental work done without anesthetic than sit in a stuffy conference room getting grilled about tech minutia for 5 hours. There's that. :)