7 ms·

You probably wouldn't like the feedback. Most interviews these days are random because our field is obsessed with finding 10x megarockstar GTD superprogrammers.

You probably wouldn't like the feedback. Most interviews these days are random because our field is obsessed with finding 10x megarockstar GTD superprogrammers. I can't think of a single field where interviews are such awful experiences. All interviews could be simple Q&A sessions to make sure the person isn't a charlatan and then sell them on the position. HR isn't a science, and it never will be. The FAANGs spend god knows how much time and money on it, and they admit that their interviews aren't better than a coin flip.

indecisive_user 7y ago
>The FAANGs spend god knows how much time and money on it, and they admit that their interviews aren't better than a coin flip. I'm curious what this means. Whiteboard style interviews aren't perfect, but at the very least they demonstrate 1. You can communicate with another engineer on a technical problem (simply writing the code with no explanation isn't sufficient), and 2. You have the determination to study CS topics for a long enough time to be prepared for an interview. Both of those skills should have at least some correlation with success at your job, certainly better than a coin flip.
- safety-third 7y ago
  I can't find the article because its hidden behind Google's previously admitted coin flip, brain teasers. An interview only has one question to answer: How long will it take this person to do what I need? Everything after that is you trying to sell the company to the candidate. After you do the interviews, you pick the person who needs the least ramp time. Quietly staring at a person writing on a whiteboard while taking notes isn't communication. It isn't normal. It tests nothing except the candidate's whiteboard interview technique. You test their communication ability... by communicating with them. Have a conversation. Testing someone's determination to do useless studying for your ridiculous company is pointless. I am not here to get you to join my cult. I am here to pay you to do things. That's it. Unless your job is to design and review algorithms, I don't care if you can draw depth first search on a whiteboard blindfolded. There are a million ways to figure out how long it will take to get a person up to speed. I make a list of the skills needed for a position. I write down an approximate time to learn each one. In each interview, I figure out what skills the person has by discussing that skill. That's it.
  - hvidgaard 7y ago
    I simply have to disagree. The amount of unqualified candidates that have a decent CV and are reasonable to talk to, but completely unable to correctly write a while loop is too damn high. That is what my whiteboard questions filter out. They're super easy stuff such as "I give you as input a list of integers, return the index of the first consecutive pair of numbers that when added is 42 - you can use any language or pseudocode". If they write it correctly, but not handle the obvious edge case with the end of the list, no pair existing, you can ask them about this. This is basic code review and discussion of a solution with a fellow developer - both very important. You'd be shocked how many people that write years of relevant programming experience and fail that. Do we get some false negatives, probably. But it's a reasonable price to pay compared to hiring someone unqualified. I think a big reason for this, is that you can teach yourself to be a developer, and all the millions of articles and videos on the topic mean you can get something done without understanding the fundamentals. I think this, for some, create a false sense of competency. It's easier with say, structural engineers - if they have an exam and or relevant work experience, there is a pretty high chance that they're up for the job. And you wouldn't hire a junior engineers without a senior person overseeing and checking their work for grave mistakes.
    - safety-third 7y ago
      I would not be shocked. I meant it when I said to weed out the charlatans. I certainly do some basic FizzBuzz. I do it over the phone and in-person because sometimes they get a friend to do the phone interview. There is a giant difference between this and the current whiteboard interview fad. I don't think false negatives are good. How many positions go unfilled for months and years? A lot. At a larger company, it won't take long before they remove the position entirely. They might not be wrong to do so either. Eventually your bus factor goes to zero, and whole teams go away. I have never seen anything beyond FizzBuzz, experience, and conversations be predictive for actual work. Even these only weed out the most outrageous candidates. I work in the chemical engineering industry. They sort resumes, ask questions, and call references. They don't ask them to do sophomore level process energy and mass balance with multiple components and vapor-liquid equilibria on a whiteboard. Most aren't Professional Engineers either. Junior engineers used to be a crap shoot. Now there are so many graduates compared to junior positions that most companies will only hire people that interned with them.
- downerending 7y ago
  I'd say some correlation, but not as much as you'd think. It's kind of like choosing your SO based on how well they kiss. The qualities that ultimately matter take a long time to get a measure of. A key one is "not an asshole", and that's generally not observable in an interview.
scarejunba 7y ago
If you can do this effectively you will beat Triplebyte easily. You're missing out on millions of dollars by not doing this.

indecisive_user 7y ago

>The FAANGs spend god knows how much time and money on it, and they admit that their interviews aren't better than a coin flip. I'm curious what this means. Whiteboard style interviews aren't perfect, but at the very least they demonstrate 1. You can communicate with another engineer on a technical problem (simply writing the code with no explanation isn't sufficient), and 2. You have the determination to study CS topics for a long enough time to be prepared for an interview. Both of those skills should have at least some correlation with success at your job, certainly better than a coin flip.

safety-third 7y ago
I can't find the article because its hidden behind Google's previously admitted coin flip, brain teasers. An interview only has one question to answer: How long will it take this person to do what I need? Everything after that is you trying to sell the company to the candidate. After you do the interviews, you pick the person who needs the least ramp time. Quietly staring at a person writing on a whiteboard while taking notes isn't communication. It isn't normal. It tests nothing except the candidate's whiteboard interview technique. You test their communication ability... by communicating with them. Have a conversation. Testing someone's determination to do useless studying for your ridiculous company is pointless. I am not here to get you to join my cult. I am here to pay you to do things. That's it. Unless your job is to design and review algorithms, I don't care if you can draw depth first search on a whiteboard blindfolded. There are a million ways to figure out how long it will take to get a person up to speed. I make a list of the skills needed for a position. I write down an approximate time to learn each one. In each interview, I figure out what skills the person has by discussing that skill. That's it.
- hvidgaard 7y ago
  I simply have to disagree. The amount of unqualified candidates that have a decent CV and are reasonable to talk to, but completely unable to correctly write a while loop is too damn high. That is what my whiteboard questions filter out. They're super easy stuff such as "I give you as input a list of integers, return the index of the first consecutive pair of numbers that when added is 42 - you can use any language or pseudocode". If they write it correctly, but not handle the obvious edge case with the end of the list, no pair existing, you can ask them about this. This is basic code review and discussion of a solution with a fellow developer - both very important. You'd be shocked how many people that write years of relevant programming experience and fail that. Do we get some false negatives, probably. But it's a reasonable price to pay compared to hiring someone unqualified. I think a big reason for this, is that you can teach yourself to be a developer, and all the millions of articles and videos on the topic mean you can get something done without understanding the fundamentals. I think this, for some, create a false sense of competency. It's easier with say, structural engineers - if they have an exam and or relevant work experience, there is a pretty high chance that they're up for the job. And you wouldn't hire a junior engineers without a senior person overseeing and checking their work for grave mistakes.
  - safety-third 7y ago
    I would not be shocked. I meant it when I said to weed out the charlatans. I certainly do some basic FizzBuzz. I do it over the phone and in-person because sometimes they get a friend to do the phone interview. There is a giant difference between this and the current whiteboard interview fad. I don't think false negatives are good. How many positions go unfilled for months and years? A lot. At a larger company, it won't take long before they remove the position entirely. They might not be wrong to do so either. Eventually your bus factor goes to zero, and whole teams go away. I have never seen anything beyond FizzBuzz, experience, and conversations be predictive for actual work. Even these only weed out the most outrageous candidates. I work in the chemical engineering industry. They sort resumes, ask questions, and call references. They don't ask them to do sophomore level process energy and mass balance with multiple components and vapor-liquid equilibria on a whiteboard. Most aren't Professional Engineers either. Junior engineers used to be a crap shoot. Now there are so many graduates compared to junior positions that most companies will only hire people that interned with them.
downerending 7y ago
I'd say some correlation, but not as much as you'd think. It's kind of like choosing your SO based on how well they kiss. The qualities that ultimately matter take a long time to get a measure of. A key one is "not an asshole", and that's generally not observable in an interview.

scarejunba 7y ago

If you can do this effectively you will beat Triplebyte easily. You're missing out on millions of dollars by not doing this.