6 ms·

Interesting. I usually do pretty well in interviews and I've always attributed that to my four years on the debate team in high school. This tells me it might b

Interesting. I usually do pretty well in interviews and I've always attributed that to my four years on the debate team in high school. This tells me it might be even more true than I previously thought. Even when I'm nervous as hell, when you put me in front of a judge (interviewer), I click into "performance mode" where I project confidence even if I know what I'm saying is BS, let alone just a bit unsure. This is how you win parliamentary debates when you've had five minutes to prepare for a topic you know little to nothing about—and I guess it helps in interviews too! That and debate gave me the ability to just start a sentence without knowing where it will end and then talk my way to a conclusion that sounds like it makes sense (useful when you have 2 minutes to prepare a 3-5 minute speech on a topic you've never seen before). So when I get up in front of a whitebard, I just start talking confidently, and even if by the end haven't solved the problem quickly or efficiently or at all, it sounds like I've been thinking sensibly about it. My takeaway, I guess—parents, make your kids do debate!

Judgmentality 6y ago
> That and debate gave me the ability to just start a sentence without knowing where it will end and then talk my way to a conclusion that sounds like it makes sense You're effectively advocating for more bullshit. The problem is that this works in the first place - we shouldn't be rewarding it.
- ipnon 6y ago
  We can't expect everyone utterance to be rational and logical. We're all just human at the end of the day. We should expect job candidates to try their best to get the job.
  - eckza 6y ago
    Yes we can! We’re computer programmers. Everything can and must be quantified. /s
- kritiko 6y ago
  What's the point of asking these sorts of questions? Typically to try to get a sense of how somebody thinks and what sort of rapport they have with the interviewer while problem solving, not that they get to the "correct" answer. I think they have some utility because this is a common occurrence when dealing with clients.
  - TheTruestKyle 6y ago
    I call this a lie. We lie to play games to attempt to get inside someone's head. Sounds like armchair psychology to create some sense of "culture"
- MattGaiser 6y ago
  He isn’t advocating it. He is just saying that you must play the system as it is.
  - maxwindiff 6y ago
    I don't know if he is really advocating it, but I absolutely support the notion that programmers should learn to bullshit better.
- commandlinefan 6y ago
  I'm not sure he's advocating for it, just pointing out that it's true.
  - Judgmentality 6y ago
    > My takeaway, I guess—parents, make your kids do debate! He's encouraging parents to make their kids learn this skillset. He is absolutely advocating for it.
    - sequoia 6y ago
      He's saying "this makes you more likely to win at the game, perhaps you want to teach your kids this skill so they can win." He is not saying "the game is fair."
    - xenihn 6y ago
      That is absolutely not the same thing. You have to play the game by the rules, that user is just telling you how to win.
    - swyx 6y ago
      don't hate the player, hate the game. easier to tweak personal actions to address the world as it is than to rant against how the world doesn't work per your ideals. at least this guy is self aware enough to admit there is some amount of bullshit in what he says. I am more concerned with people who refuse to admit this, or worse, genuinely don't believe it.
- twicetwice 6y ago
  You're right, unfortunately that's what it sounds like I'm saying. It's not really what I meant. The idea I was trying to get across is closer to "being able to communicate what I'm thinking about as I'm thinking about it, and verbalizing that as a coherent sentence rather than just fragments." Ironically, I wish I had communicated that better :)
  - wallfacer 6y ago
    I’m a person who finds out what I’m thinking as I speak. Iterating towards an idea with confidence in each turn. Even if you end up in the vicinity of where you started, problem not actually solved, you demonstrate how you move through problem space. Similar to another comment I read comparing interviews to athletic tryouts and competition, which tries to assess how a body moves through physical space.
ipnon 6y ago
Rhetoric was the most respected skill in Ancient Athens.[0] I think we would do well to stop thinking of rhetoric, debating, and public speaking as hobbies for some high school students. They are essential skills for wealth creation and advancement in society. [0] https://liberalarts.online/trivium-and-quadrivium/ https://liberalarts.online/trivium-and-quadrivium/
Apocryphon 6y ago
or Model U.N.
gwbas1c 6y ago
> That and debate gave me the ability to just start a sentence without knowing where it will end ... it sounds like I've been thinking sensibly about it. I've always structured my interviews to weed that kind of thing out.
- kritiko 6y ago
  I'd be interested to hear more about how you do that, and what you try to select for instead.
  - gwbas1c 6y ago
    Comprehension. Ironically, I just started writing a blog post about it 10 minutes ago. To summarize, I try and get the candidate to discuss tradeoffs between different approaches to common situations that the candidate should be familiar with. For example: Should GetUserById(int userId) return a null, or throw an exception, when there is no user with the ID? Explain the tradeoffs; or explain why each approach is better in different situations. Should you deserialize (xml or JSON) to a dictionary or a strongly-typed object? What if you need to manipulate the document while preserving fields that you didn't know about at compile time? Assuming you have the experience I'm screening for, you either know the tradeoffs or you don't.
    - ativzzz 6y ago
      Any open ended question like > Explain the tradeoffs will benefit greatly from being able to synthesize a bunch of information out of some simple base. Yea you need to know the technical details but being able to explain tradeoffs is more abstract and the OPs method will just lead to a better answer here.
      - twicetwice 6y ago
        Exactly, yes! It's about explaining what you're thinking about as you think about it. Silence is a killer in interviews in my experience (not always—you can be strategic—but for the most part), and I try to minimize dead air in any interview I'm in.
UncleOxidant 6y ago
> That and debate gave me the ability to just start a sentence without knowing where it will end and then talk my way to a conclusion that sounds like it makes sense That sounds like a good skill to have in marketing, sales or politics. It sounds like a bad skill to have for engineering.
- thelean12 6y ago
  And an interview is very much marketing and sales of your skills :)
canada_dry 6y ago
> project confidence even if I know what I'm saying is BS One of my very worst bosses had this quality. Perversely, it was about the only thing I admired about him. The guy could walk into a meeting of NASA flight engineers and engage in conversation without uttering a single fact that would betray his total lack of any knowledge/qualifications. n.b. He was fired not long after I left the company.
- twicetwice 6y ago
  To be clear: I don't advocate for doing that, and I don't try to BS my interviewers. That's why I said "let alone if I'm just a bit unsure"—if, during high school debate, I can confidently BS, then now, during an interview, I can confidently talk even if I'm nervous and not fully sure of myself.
fuzzythinker 6y ago
An upvote is warranted for a life long gift to kids to be able to communicate confidently. A downvote is warranted for giving a bad advice on gaming a system and giving both parties in an interview process a poor indication of what is expected in possibly years to come. Thus, no vote given. I think given what I read about debate teams -- on podcasts and here in HN, I am on the fence on suggesting that to my kids. There are certainly great benefits, but not too certain if those out weights the drawbacks.
- arp242 6y ago
  I'm not from a country that really does "debate teams", but as I understand them a lot seems to be about "winning the argument", which doesn't strike me as especially great. On the other hand, it probably makes people better at spotting a bad/fallacious arguments, and gain appreciation that complex topics tend to have multiple reasonable opinions on it – two things we desperately need more of.
  - fuzzythinker 6y ago
    True, "winning the argument" is one of the main drawbacks I fear. The main benefits for me is to foster (often quick) logical thinking and reasoning and the ability to articulate it. It is difficult to build this skill without a "debate team" setting. More so if your kids are more on the shyness scale.
    - twicetwice 6y ago
      I completely agree with all of that. Interestingly, I was an extremely shy kid growing up—less so now.
- twicetwice 6y ago
  I don't mean to give advice on gaming the system—I'm sorry if I came across that way. The point I was trying to make was much closer to your first line—that the current interviewing system rewards confidence and communication skills, and that debate helped me build those. Ironically, I wish I had communicated that better :) Also, I agree that there are drawbacks to doing debate. For one, there's a certain "debate kid" mentality that I picked up and had to unlearn.
smilekzs 6y ago
I concur. I did BP for only 1 semester in college but the experience proved to be valuable down the line. It forces you to articulate yourself "on the fly", streaming out ideas as they are formed (from core principles / bullet points you have in your mind).
- twicetwice 6y ago
  Yes, exactly!

Judgmentality 6y ago

> That and debate gave me the ability to just start a sentence without knowing where it will end and then talk my way to a conclusion that sounds like it makes sense You're effectively advocating for more bullshit. The problem is that this works in the first place - we shouldn't be rewarding it.

ipnon 6y ago
We can't expect everyone utterance to be rational and logical. We're all just human at the end of the day. We should expect job candidates to try their best to get the job.
- eckza 6y ago
  Yes we can! We’re computer programmers. Everything can and must be quantified. /s
kritiko 6y ago
What's the point of asking these sorts of questions? Typically to try to get a sense of how somebody thinks and what sort of rapport they have with the interviewer while problem solving, not that they get to the "correct" answer. I think they have some utility because this is a common occurrence when dealing with clients.
- TheTruestKyle 6y ago
  I call this a lie. We lie to play games to attempt to get inside someone's head. Sounds like armchair psychology to create some sense of "culture"
MattGaiser 6y ago
He isn’t advocating it. He is just saying that you must play the system as it is.
- maxwindiff 6y ago
  I don't know if he is really advocating it, but I absolutely support the notion that programmers should learn to bullshit better.
commandlinefan 6y ago
I'm not sure he's advocating for it, just pointing out that it's true.
- Judgmentality 6y ago
  > My takeaway, I guess—parents, make your kids do debate! He's encouraging parents to make their kids learn this skillset. He is absolutely advocating for it.
  - sequoia 6y ago
    He's saying "this makes you more likely to win at the game, perhaps you want to teach your kids this skill so they can win." He is not saying "the game is fair."
  - xenihn 6y ago
    That is absolutely not the same thing. You have to play the game by the rules, that user is just telling you how to win.
  - swyx 6y ago
    don't hate the player, hate the game. easier to tweak personal actions to address the world as it is than to rant against how the world doesn't work per your ideals. at least this guy is self aware enough to admit there is some amount of bullshit in what he says. I am more concerned with people who refuse to admit this, or worse, genuinely don't believe it.
twicetwice 6y ago
You're right, unfortunately that's what it sounds like I'm saying. It's not really what I meant. The idea I was trying to get across is closer to "being able to communicate what I'm thinking about as I'm thinking about it, and verbalizing that as a coherent sentence rather than just fragments." Ironically, I wish I had communicated that better :)
- wallfacer 6y ago
  I’m a person who finds out what I’m thinking as I speak. Iterating towards an idea with confidence in each turn. Even if you end up in the vicinity of where you started, problem not actually solved, you demonstrate how you move through problem space. Similar to another comment I read comparing interviews to athletic tryouts and competition, which tries to assess how a body moves through physical space.

ipnon 6y ago

Rhetoric was the most respected skill in Ancient Athens.[0] I think we would do well to stop thinking of rhetoric, debating, and public speaking as hobbies for some high school students. They are essential skills for wealth creation and advancement in society. [0] https://liberalarts.online/trivium-and-quadrivium/ https://liberalarts.online/trivium-and-quadrivium/

Apocryphon 6y ago

or Model U.N.

gwbas1c 6y ago

> That and debate gave me the ability to just start a sentence without knowing where it will end ... it sounds like I've been thinking sensibly about it. I've always structured my interviews to weed that kind of thing out.

kritiko 6y ago
I'd be interested to hear more about how you do that, and what you try to select for instead.
- gwbas1c 6y ago
  Comprehension. Ironically, I just started writing a blog post about it 10 minutes ago. To summarize, I try and get the candidate to discuss tradeoffs between different approaches to common situations that the candidate should be familiar with. For example: Should GetUserById(int userId) return a null, or throw an exception, when there is no user with the ID? Explain the tradeoffs; or explain why each approach is better in different situations. Should you deserialize (xml or JSON) to a dictionary or a strongly-typed object? What if you need to manipulate the document while preserving fields that you didn't know about at compile time? Assuming you have the experience I'm screening for, you either know the tradeoffs or you don't.
  - ativzzz 6y ago
    Any open ended question like > Explain the tradeoffs will benefit greatly from being able to synthesize a bunch of information out of some simple base. Yea you need to know the technical details but being able to explain tradeoffs is more abstract and the OPs method will just lead to a better answer here.
    - twicetwice 6y ago
      Exactly, yes! It's about explaining what you're thinking about as you think about it. Silence is a killer in interviews in my experience (not always—you can be strategic—but for the most part), and I try to minimize dead air in any interview I'm in.

UncleOxidant 6y ago

> That and debate gave me the ability to just start a sentence without knowing where it will end and then talk my way to a conclusion that sounds like it makes sense That sounds like a good skill to have in marketing, sales or politics. It sounds like a bad skill to have for engineering.

thelean12 6y ago
And an interview is very much marketing and sales of your skills :)

canada_dry 6y ago

> project confidence even if I know what I'm saying is BS One of my very worst bosses had this quality. Perversely, it was about the only thing I admired about him. The guy could walk into a meeting of NASA flight engineers and engage in conversation without uttering a single fact that would betray his total lack of any knowledge/qualifications. n.b. He was fired not long after I left the company.

twicetwice 6y ago
To be clear: I don't advocate for doing that, and I don't try to BS my interviewers. That's why I said "let alone if I'm just a bit unsure"—if, during high school debate, I can confidently BS, then now, during an interview, I can confidently talk even if I'm nervous and not fully sure of myself.

fuzzythinker 6y ago

An upvote is warranted for a life long gift to kids to be able to communicate confidently. A downvote is warranted for giving a bad advice on gaming a system and giving both parties in an interview process a poor indication of what is expected in possibly years to come. Thus, no vote given. I think given what I read about debate teams -- on podcasts and here in HN, I am on the fence on suggesting that to my kids. There are certainly great benefits, but not too certain if those out weights the drawbacks.

arp242 6y ago
I'm not from a country that really does "debate teams", but as I understand them a lot seems to be about "winning the argument", which doesn't strike me as especially great. On the other hand, it probably makes people better at spotting a bad/fallacious arguments, and gain appreciation that complex topics tend to have multiple reasonable opinions on it – two things we desperately need more of.
- fuzzythinker 6y ago
  True, "winning the argument" is one of the main drawbacks I fear. The main benefits for me is to foster (often quick) logical thinking and reasoning and the ability to articulate it. It is difficult to build this skill without a "debate team" setting. More so if your kids are more on the shyness scale.
  - twicetwice 6y ago
    I completely agree with all of that. Interestingly, I was an extremely shy kid growing up—less so now.
twicetwice 6y ago
I don't mean to give advice on gaming the system—I'm sorry if I came across that way. The point I was trying to make was much closer to your first line—that the current interviewing system rewards confidence and communication skills, and that debate helped me build those. Ironically, I wish I had communicated that better :) Also, I agree that there are drawbacks to doing debate. For one, there's a certain "debate kid" mentality that I picked up and had to unlearn.

smilekzs 6y ago

I concur. I did BP for only 1 semester in college but the experience proved to be valuable down the line. It forces you to articulate yourself "on the fly", streaming out ideas as they are formed (from core principles / bullet points you have in your mind).

twicetwice 6y ago
Yes, exactly!