3 ms·

Not a single person out of several thousand emails and messages came out in defense of the current state of interviewing processes That's largely due to the po

Not a single person out of several thousand emails and messages came out in defense of the current state of interviewing processes That's largely due to the position taken up in "The dystopian world of software engineering interviews". Had the article been a defense of current interview practices, you would have received sentiments to the opposite effect. Here's a comment on the original thread doing what you said "not a single person" has done: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22332023 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22332023

PragmaticPulp 7y ago
> Not a single person out of several thousand emails and messages came out in defense of the current state of interviewing processes I agree that this was a cheap shot from the author. The current zeitgeist of hiring practices is that we're all obligated to chant "interviews are broken" without ever suggesting alternatives. Suggesting alternatives is dangerous because someone, somewhere will come up with a reason why your suggested practice is bad. Even the author of the article avoids suggesting any alternatives. It's the equivalent of politicians saying that they're "deeply troubled" by something, and then proceeding to do nothing because they are secretly okay with the status quo. No one is dumb enough to go out of their way to publicly argue in favor of the current hiring practices in this atmosphere. Yet when we're put in the hot seat on a hiring committee, we all fall back on the tried and true methods of interviewing for a reason.
- perl4ever 7y ago
  "we're all obligated to chant "interviews are broken" without ever suggesting alternatives" Nah, there's somebody who hates everything, but there are plenty of things that somebody likes. I'd be happy with both take-home problems at a moderate effort level, and Fermi problems. Clearly many people go out of their way to declaim how much they hate those things, and I don't know where to find companies that hire based on them and pay a lot, but it would make me happy.

PragmaticPulp 7y ago

> Not a single person out of several thousand emails and messages came out in defense of the current state of interviewing processes I agree that this was a cheap shot from the author. The current zeitgeist of hiring practices is that we're all obligated to chant "interviews are broken" without ever suggesting alternatives. Suggesting alternatives is dangerous because someone, somewhere will come up with a reason why your suggested practice is bad. Even the author of the article avoids suggesting any alternatives. It's the equivalent of politicians saying that they're "deeply troubled" by something, and then proceeding to do nothing because they are secretly okay with the status quo. No one is dumb enough to go out of their way to publicly argue in favor of the current hiring practices in this atmosphere. Yet when we're put in the hot seat on a hiring committee, we all fall back on the tried and true methods of interviewing for a reason.

perl4ever 7y ago
"we're all obligated to chant "interviews are broken" without ever suggesting alternatives" Nah, there's somebody who hates everything, but there are plenty of things that somebody likes. I'd be happy with both take-home problems at a moderate effort level, and Fermi problems. Clearly many people go out of their way to declaim how much they hate those things, and I don't know where to find companies that hire based on them and pay a lot, but it would make me happy.