5 ms·

That's how long people study for the bar and board exams. And that's after investing years and hundreds of thousands of dollars in extra schooling. You also d

That's how long people study for the bar and board exams. And that's after investing years and hundreds of thousands of dollars in extra schooling. You also don't get to retake those every couple years.

thaumasiotes 7y ago
> You also don't get to retake those every couple years. What? Yes you do. https://barprephero.com/learn/how-many-times-take-bar-exam/ https://barprephero.com/learn/how-many-times-take-bar-exam/
- mattkrause 7y ago
  But once you pass it and are admitted to the bar, you're set (assuming you renew your membership, don't change states, etc).
  - klipt 7y ago
    > you're set If you mean set in terms of money, lawyer pay is strongly bimodal these days, with most lawyers earning the lower amount: https://www.lawcrossing.com/article/900049851/Is-Law-Still-a-Prestigious-and-Profitable-Business/ https://www.lawcrossing.com/article/900049851/Is-Law-Still-a...
    - Apocryphon 7y ago
      You're set in the sense that you don't have to take the exam again.
pishpash 7y ago
For those you get credentialed once and you're done. Not the same thing at all.
- dvtrn 7y ago
  This was my same thought. Bar exam is an exam that leads to holding a professional license, I’m not seeing the comparison either other than “people are committed to the process”. Which...seems flimsy given (among other distinctions) the earning potential over the lifetime of a licensed attorney and the lifetime of someone who interviews for a Google job.
pandaman 7y ago
There is a huge difference between a one time evaluation of an aspiring candidate to become a professional and a routine job interview for an established professional changing jobs in the same profession.
- google234123 7y ago
  You can keep your Google job for 20+ years if you want.
  - sillyconvalley 7y ago
    You know this is a false equivalence. The Bar is to make sure you actually understand now only law, but also things like ethics. Whereas a Google interview wants you to code an AVL tree in Brainfuck with your toes while reciting the alphabet backwards because "that's what they made ME do and I got hired and am smart, so that must be what works".
- OkayPhysicist 7y ago
  Maybe software engineering needs a professional bar. A test, like engineers or lawyers or doctors need to take that proves you can reason with algorithms, and have some standard base of knowledge that ought be expected of a programmer. It would be a win-win. Companies could say "we only hire professionals" in order to avoid wading through the kinds of idiots that Fizzbuzz is designed to screen, and candidates no longer need to repeatedly prove they can put the star peg in the star hole.
- wan23 7y ago
  It would be pretty nice if as an industry we could figure out how to apply the DRY principle to interviewing. It's the biggest waste of time for both for candidates and interviewers that we need to establish whether a candidate with 20 years of experience can write a for loop every time they apply for any job.
  - pandaman 7y ago
    In my uneducated opinion, Google's hazing interview is not to establish whether one can write a for loop or not but to establish how dedicated one is to working at Google. An anecdote: I interviewed at Google ~10 years ago and failed. They did not ask anything complicated (I don't know if it was because the polices were different or they actually needed someone with my expertise) but I had a complete brain freeze for some reason. Anyways, ever since then a Google recruiter reaches out every year or so. I always tell them to get lost because I already failed and they always respond that most of their employees pass on second or third time only. Now, recruiters could have been lying about that but on the other hand, they obviously know that I applied before yet want me to apply again. I'd imagine a regular company would have done something about their recruitment process if they had that many false negatives. However, if I wanted to get dedicated employees, that would be exactly how I hired.
mixmastamyk 7y ago
Perhaps, but it won’t be one or two binary pass/fail questions at random. Because that would be… ridiculous.
schnable 7y ago
Most of those accreditations exist only as a barrier to join the guild and limiting the supply of people in an industry, driving up costs. They establish some baseline of competency but it's mostly just a way to keep people out of the field.
- OkayPhysicist 7y ago
  Well, if companies are using toy coding examples like Fizzbuzz to screen people, then clearly we could use with a baseline of competency in our field.

thaumasiotes 7y ago

> You also don't get to retake those every couple years. What? Yes you do. https://barprephero.com/learn/how-many-times-take-bar-exam/ https://barprephero.com/learn/how-many-times-take-bar-exam/

mattkrause 7y ago
But once you pass it and are admitted to the bar, you're set (assuming you renew your membership, don't change states, etc).
- klipt 7y ago
  > you're set If you mean set in terms of money, lawyer pay is strongly bimodal these days, with most lawyers earning the lower amount: https://www.lawcrossing.com/article/900049851/Is-Law-Still-a-Prestigious-and-Profitable-Business/ https://www.lawcrossing.com/article/900049851/Is-Law-Still-a...
  - Apocryphon 7y ago
    You're set in the sense that you don't have to take the exam again.

pishpash 7y ago

For those you get credentialed once and you're done. Not the same thing at all.

dvtrn 7y ago
This was my same thought. Bar exam is an exam that leads to holding a professional license, I’m not seeing the comparison either other than “people are committed to the process”. Which...seems flimsy given (among other distinctions) the earning potential over the lifetime of a licensed attorney and the lifetime of someone who interviews for a Google job.

pandaman 7y ago

There is a huge difference between a one time evaluation of an aspiring candidate to become a professional and a routine job interview for an established professional changing jobs in the same profession.

google234123 7y ago
You can keep your Google job for 20+ years if you want.
- sillyconvalley 7y ago
  You know this is a false equivalence. The Bar is to make sure you actually understand now only law, but also things like ethics. Whereas a Google interview wants you to code an AVL tree in Brainfuck with your toes while reciting the alphabet backwards because "that's what they made ME do and I got hired and am smart, so that must be what works".
OkayPhysicist 7y ago
Maybe software engineering needs a professional bar. A test, like engineers or lawyers or doctors need to take that proves you can reason with algorithms, and have some standard base of knowledge that ought be expected of a programmer. It would be a win-win. Companies could say "we only hire professionals" in order to avoid wading through the kinds of idiots that Fizzbuzz is designed to screen, and candidates no longer need to repeatedly prove they can put the star peg in the star hole.
wan23 7y ago
It would be pretty nice if as an industry we could figure out how to apply the DRY principle to interviewing. It's the biggest waste of time for both for candidates and interviewers that we need to establish whether a candidate with 20 years of experience can write a for loop every time they apply for any job.
- pandaman 7y ago
  In my uneducated opinion, Google's hazing interview is not to establish whether one can write a for loop or not but to establish how dedicated one is to working at Google. An anecdote: I interviewed at Google ~10 years ago and failed. They did not ask anything complicated (I don't know if it was because the polices were different or they actually needed someone with my expertise) but I had a complete brain freeze for some reason. Anyways, ever since then a Google recruiter reaches out every year or so. I always tell them to get lost because I already failed and they always respond that most of their employees pass on second or third time only. Now, recruiters could have been lying about that but on the other hand, they obviously know that I applied before yet want me to apply again. I'd imagine a regular company would have done something about their recruitment process if they had that many false negatives. However, if I wanted to get dedicated employees, that would be exactly how I hired.

mixmastamyk 7y ago

Perhaps, but it won’t be one or two binary pass/fail questions at random. Because that would be… ridiculous.

schnable 7y ago

Most of those accreditations exist only as a barrier to join the guild and limiting the supply of people in an industry, driving up costs. They establish some baseline of competency but it's mostly just a way to keep people out of the field.

OkayPhysicist 7y ago
Well, if companies are using toy coding examples like Fizzbuzz to screen people, then clearly we could use with a baseline of competency in our field.