3 ms·
False negatives waste far less time (dollars) than false positives. It’s unfair but worth it to not force a team to have to work with an unqualified candidate f
by berdon 7y ago
False negatives waste far less time (dollars) than false positives. It’s unfair but worth it to not force a team to have to work with an unqualified candidate for a year or maybe more.
- Apocryphon 7y agoThe problem with an unyielding, fairly uniform obsession with interview problems unrelated to actual day-to-day development is that you're institutionalizing Goodhart's Law. Eventually the interviews will encourage false positives as candidates grind on CTCI and LeetCode and pass interviews without actually being able to excel at actual work responsibilities.
- berdon 7y agoI don’t think so. That’s why you’ll have candidates passing the questions but not the interview. We’re not looking got rote answers, we’re looking for comprehension, problem solving, and discussion.
- Apocryphon 7y agoIt’s perfectly possible to drill and take preparatory courses to finesse communication skills specifically for answering and explaining whiteboarding algo/ds questions. These resources are perfectly aware that rote memorization is insufficient but being able to communicate is also required to game these interviews.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- falcolas 7y agoThis right here, I don’t get. Why TF would a manager make you work with unqualified people for a year+? Between evaluation periods and at-will employment, there’s no reason this should happen.