4 ms·

their submission was incomplete. But then over the next three paragraphs, they explained what they would have done. I would not hire this candidate for an IC r

by p1esk 6y ago

their submission was incomplete. But then over the next three paragraphs, they explained what they would have done. I would not hire this candidate for an IC role based on this submission. The main quality I'm looking for in an engineer is "gets things done". If this was a manager role, then sure. A manager could describe what they would have done or (preferably) what they did in a similar situation. They were given two (!) weeks to complete a simple task. I saw no excuse for not delivering.

coffee 6y ago
> They were given two (!) weeks to complete a simple task. I saw no excuse for not delivering. So you're saying that in your worldview, it is 100% acceptable for a pre-interview candidate to spend a full 2 weeks (or even a significant portion of that) coding something, for free, at the off chance they'll maybe get an actual interview?
- p1esk 6y ago
  Yes. If I want a job badly enough, I'm willing to spend 2 years preparing for a chance to have an interview there. For example, if I wanted to work at a top AI lab (like DeepMind, FAIR, or OpenAI), I'd better start working on a paper that gets accepted at NeurIPS, or a research project that puts me on their radar. If that's not 100% acceptable in your worldview, then perhaps you're not who they're looking for.
  - coffee 6y ago
    This is reaching far beyond the context of the article, and the comments replying to it with this example.
p1necone 6y ago
"Gets things done" while at work sure. But "gets things done" on nights and weekends while juggling their existing job and whatever else they also need to get done outside of work seems like less of a concern to me. I also wouldn't call this task simple, it's not fizzbuzz. It's going to take reasonable chunk of time even if you go into it knowing what you need to do.
- p1esk 6y ago
  Think of this as a game, or a race. It's up to you if you want to participate. No one is forcing you. There are plenty of others willing to play this game. If you want the job you'll find time. If I were looking for a job, I'd welcome an extra hard test, because it's my opportunity to shine, and it reduces competition.
PopeDotNinja 6y ago
I don't like open ended coding interviews because they are too easy to game. I assume that a place with this style of interview is full of people who gamed the system, and that makes me not want to work there. This is more of an emotional reaction, but it makes me less likely to complete a coding exercise. And if I feel that way, that makes me think the company is less competitive in attracting the kind of people I'd like to work with.
- hellisothers 6y ago
  Easier to game than leetcode style DS&A questions that can generally be passed by rigorous studying for weeks beforehand only to be forgotten days later? If I’m interviewing at a company to make a CRUD iOS App and every dev has a hard on for 60 minute DS&A questions I’d run. They’re probably reinventing every wheel possible
bleah1000 6y ago
This is the kind of attitude that leads to bad hiring outcomes. It is guaranteed to be screening out classes of people, like single parents, candidates who may have a full time job as they are finishing their school work, people who care for elderly parents, people with families, etc. Heck, anyone who's going through a crunch time at their work would also probably be unable to do this. You might as well say that your company has a terrible work-life balance and we only hire people willing to destroy their health for us. Maybe that's what some companies want, but I don't think a company can grow only hiring like that. Even the article said that by changing their test they wound up getting stronger candidates. It is clear that this kind of process does not produce the best candidates.
Grue3 6y ago
Yeah, this sounds like a typical "idea guy" who won't be able to write a FizzBuzz. Seriously, minimax for tic-tac-toe?

by p1esk 6y ago

coffee 6y ago

> They were given two (!) weeks to complete a simple task. I saw no excuse for not delivering. So you're saying that in your worldview, it is 100% acceptable for a pre-interview candidate to spend a full 2 weeks (or even a significant portion of that) coding something, for free, at the off chance they'll maybe get an actual interview?

p1esk 6y ago
Yes. If I want a job badly enough, I'm willing to spend 2 years preparing for a chance to have an interview there. For example, if I wanted to work at a top AI lab (like DeepMind, FAIR, or OpenAI), I'd better start working on a paper that gets accepted at NeurIPS, or a research project that puts me on their radar. If that's not 100% acceptable in your worldview, then perhaps you're not who they're looking for.
- coffee 6y ago
  This is reaching far beyond the context of the article, and the comments replying to it with this example.

p1necone 6y ago

"Gets things done" while at work sure. But "gets things done" on nights and weekends while juggling their existing job and whatever else they also need to get done outside of work seems like less of a concern to me. I also wouldn't call this task simple, it's not fizzbuzz. It's going to take reasonable chunk of time even if you go into it knowing what you need to do.

p1esk 6y ago
Think of this as a game, or a race. It's up to you if you want to participate. No one is forcing you. There are plenty of others willing to play this game. If you want the job you'll find time. If I were looking for a job, I'd welcome an extra hard test, because it's my opportunity to shine, and it reduces competition.

PopeDotNinja 6y ago

I don't like open ended coding interviews because they are too easy to game. I assume that a place with this style of interview is full of people who gamed the system, and that makes me not want to work there. This is more of an emotional reaction, but it makes me less likely to complete a coding exercise. And if I feel that way, that makes me think the company is less competitive in attracting the kind of people I'd like to work with.

hellisothers 6y ago
Easier to game than leetcode style DS&A questions that can generally be passed by rigorous studying for weeks beforehand only to be forgotten days later? If I’m interviewing at a company to make a CRUD iOS App and every dev has a hard on for 60 minute DS&A questions I’d run. They’re probably reinventing every wheel possible

bleah1000 6y ago

This is the kind of attitude that leads to bad hiring outcomes. It is guaranteed to be screening out classes of people, like single parents, candidates who may have a full time job as they are finishing their school work, people who care for elderly parents, people with families, etc. Heck, anyone who's going through a crunch time at their work would also probably be unable to do this. You might as well say that your company has a terrible work-life balance and we only hire people willing to destroy their health for us. Maybe that's what some companies want, but I don't think a company can grow only hiring like that. Even the article said that by changing their test they wound up getting stronger candidates. It is clear that this kind of process does not produce the best candidates.

Grue3 6y ago

Yeah, this sounds like a typical "idea guy" who won't be able to write a FizzBuzz. Seriously, minimax for tic-tac-toe?