4 ms·

I've applied for positions at companies that ask these kind of questions, when the actual job is fixing CSS issues and making basic CRUD applications. Intervie

I've applied for positions at companies that ask these kind of questions, when the actual job is fixing CSS issues and making basic CRUD applications. Interviews should be a balance between testing problem solving, ability to learn, and knowledge that applies to the actual job they would be doing.

sidchilling 6y ago
Unfortunately, interviews, as they are currently, are more an indicator of preparation rather than job performance. It’s a game; you gotta play it.
- lmarcos 6y ago
  > You gotta play it. If you want a job in those companies, sure. But if you want a decent job in a decent software company, you don't have to go through all that show. There are companies that don't ask that sort of questions and instead they interview you in a sane manner (they ask about past experience, they let you talk about what you actually know... The whole interview feels like a conversation).
  - decafninja 6y ago
    I disagree. I've been interviewing heavily the past 3 years and I've noticed that at least for the major US tech hubs (say, SFBA, Seattle, NYC, as well as LA, and from my understanding, London in the UK too) pretty much all the companies I would rate as "decent" or better to have a career as a SWE are gatekeeped by leetcode interviews. Difficulty and selectivity varies of course. There are exceptions, but they are getting fewer and fewer. i.e. some companies that did not leetcode when I got my current job (5 years ago) are now leetcoding. Even companies in that famous "they don't whiteboard" list will leetcode you from my experience (I reckon its really a team by team basis thing). You might be able to find a good company that will not leetcode you, but if you are trying to maximize your potential to get a good job at a good company, the best strategy is to grind leetcode, as opposed to hunting for a White Whale.
    - cosmotic 6y ago
      In my experience, leetcode-type interviews are indicative of a not-good job at a not-good company.
      - decafninja 6y ago
        Maybe your definitions aren't the same as mine (which is perfectly fine!). My own definition of a good company to work for as a SWE would be somewhere that: - treats and respects tech and technologists as valuable first class citizens. Not merely a necessary evil. - good compensation and perks. - good working environment. - great, talented colleagues. - bonus: looks great on your resume and opens doors to potential future opportunities. I would say most jobs at most well known tech companies (say, FAANG and others) would qualify...and most are gatekeeped by leetcode. I'm guessing you would not consider these to be good companies?
        cosmotic 6y ago
        I think all those are great things to have. leetcode and puzzle-based interviews are indicative of thoughtless interview process that are lacking evidence as to their efficacy. Google used to focus on puzzles so everyone followed. Eventually google thought to look at the efficacy and realized it was poor, so google focused much less on the puzzles and it's taking a long time for folks to catch up. If an organization claims to respect evidence (as most large tech companies do) but have lackluster or nonexistent feedback loops around interviews, that hypocrisy is a red flag. Take home tests like leetcode show a lack of respect and trust in the engineers, which I consider a bad work environment. The high pay is usually because the organizations have tons of cash and are rarely indicative of interesting work (or the work is interesting but the product is discarded after completion). Most large, high paying, highly respected software companies have been stagnating for over a decade and sailing through on their monopolies. Then there are ethical considerations. At least that's how I justify avoiding that world. Maybe I'm totally out of touch with reality.
- speedgoose 6y ago
  You don't have to in Europe.
  - visarga 6y ago
    My experience says otherwise.
  - sidchilling 6y ago
    That’s interesting. Could you expand a bit more? How do interviews happen in Europe? I interviewed with booking.com in Amsterdam a couple years ago and it was the same thing — same questions testing prep.
    - lmarcos 6y ago
      Just apply to any non-famous software company (95% of the software companies in Amsterdam) and you will find decent interviews (no tricky tests).
      - zerr 6y ago
        I believe the same applies to most non-famous companies in US or other places as well.
    - Apocryphon 6y ago
      Booking.com feels like a particularly Silicon Valley-savvy European company. They seemed to be an early adopter of HN: Who's Hiring? threads, for instance.
    - speedgoose 6y ago
      In my experience and also from what my friends and co-workers told me, it's a lot more about your network and your experience. If you have a good resume and people recommending you, you skip the technical interview part. I interviewed for one American company once. Didn't like it despite the nice hotel. I also didn't get the job.
  - bot41 6y ago
qppo 6y ago
Either end of the hiring channel is extremely noisy, recruiters work by spamming and candidates get seen by spamming. In my anecdotal experience, maybe 1 in 10 of any given job listing or applicant is worth pursuing. These questions are a less bad way of filtering people out than others. They're not the only filters used, and others have different tradeoffs. Sometimes if you're hitting these questions it's because the other filters have already excluded you.
21eleven 6y ago
That's true but then companies would have a problem where too many people still look qualified after going through rounds of interviews. If a given company has a lot of people who want to work for it then it makes sense for that company to have people attempt very challenging programming exercises so that the org can filter the applicant pool down to the number of positions they have open. These companies have the luxury of being able to have hiring processes that turn away perfectly good applicants that couldn't pass their tests (false negatives).
- deadmutex 6y ago
  > it makes sense for that company to have people attempt very challenging programming exercises Perhaps. I would also encourage companies to look past programming ability, and consider things like work ethic etc. I would argue that once you can do the job, reliably showing up and working hard every day has a lot of impact.
  - phenkdo 6y ago
    I feel that is a false dichotomy: programming ability is strongly correlated with work ethic.
    - luckylion 6y ago
      Has that been studied? It doesn't match my experience, I saw them pretty unrelated.
  - ksk 6y ago
    You are 100% correct. As a manager I would love to test for work ethic, honesty, being a team-player, etc. The problem is I can only infer those qualities based on signals that are inherently noisy. The only way you really know of those qualities is by working with them over a period of time. A solution to this is to hire through your network, especially via someone who has worked with the candidate. But that certainly limits your pool.
- zinckiwi 6y ago
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

sidchilling 6y ago

Unfortunately, interviews, as they are currently, are more an indicator of preparation rather than job performance. It’s a game; you gotta play it.

lmarcos 6y ago
> You gotta play it. If you want a job in those companies, sure. But if you want a decent job in a decent software company, you don't have to go through all that show. There are companies that don't ask that sort of questions and instead they interview you in a sane manner (they ask about past experience, they let you talk about what you actually know... The whole interview feels like a conversation).
- decafninja 6y ago
  I disagree. I've been interviewing heavily the past 3 years and I've noticed that at least for the major US tech hubs (say, SFBA, Seattle, NYC, as well as LA, and from my understanding, London in the UK too) pretty much all the companies I would rate as "decent" or better to have a career as a SWE are gatekeeped by leetcode interviews. Difficulty and selectivity varies of course. There are exceptions, but they are getting fewer and fewer. i.e. some companies that did not leetcode when I got my current job (5 years ago) are now leetcoding. Even companies in that famous "they don't whiteboard" list will leetcode you from my experience (I reckon its really a team by team basis thing). You might be able to find a good company that will not leetcode you, but if you are trying to maximize your potential to get a good job at a good company, the best strategy is to grind leetcode, as opposed to hunting for a White Whale.
  - cosmotic 6y ago
    In my experience, leetcode-type interviews are indicative of a not-good job at a not-good company.
    - decafninja 6y ago
      Maybe your definitions aren't the same as mine (which is perfectly fine!). My own definition of a good company to work for as a SWE would be somewhere that: - treats and respects tech and technologists as valuable first class citizens. Not merely a necessary evil. - good compensation and perks. - good working environment. - great, talented colleagues. - bonus: looks great on your resume and opens doors to potential future opportunities. I would say most jobs at most well known tech companies (say, FAANG and others) would qualify...and most are gatekeeped by leetcode. I'm guessing you would not consider these to be good companies?
      - cosmotic 6y ago
        I think all those are great things to have. leetcode and puzzle-based interviews are indicative of thoughtless interview process that are lacking evidence as to their efficacy. Google used to focus on puzzles so everyone followed. Eventually google thought to look at the efficacy and realized it was poor, so google focused much less on the puzzles and it's taking a long time for folks to catch up. If an organization claims to respect evidence (as most large tech companies do) but have lackluster or nonexistent feedback loops around interviews, that hypocrisy is a red flag. Take home tests like leetcode show a lack of respect and trust in the engineers, which I consider a bad work environment. The high pay is usually because the organizations have tons of cash and are rarely indicative of interesting work (or the work is interesting but the product is discarded after completion). Most large, high paying, highly respected software companies have been stagnating for over a decade and sailing through on their monopolies. Then there are ethical considerations. At least that's how I justify avoiding that world. Maybe I'm totally out of touch with reality.
speedgoose 6y ago
You don't have to in Europe.
- visarga 6y ago
  My experience says otherwise.
- sidchilling 6y ago
  That’s interesting. Could you expand a bit more? How do interviews happen in Europe? I interviewed with booking.com in Amsterdam a couple years ago and it was the same thing — same questions testing prep.
  - lmarcos 6y ago
    Just apply to any non-famous software company (95% of the software companies in Amsterdam) and you will find decent interviews (no tricky tests).
    - zerr 6y ago
      I believe the same applies to most non-famous companies in US or other places as well.
  - Apocryphon 6y ago
    Booking.com feels like a particularly Silicon Valley-savvy European company. They seemed to be an early adopter of HN: Who's Hiring? threads, for instance.
  - speedgoose 6y ago
    In my experience and also from what my friends and co-workers told me, it's a lot more about your network and your experience. If you have a good resume and people recommending you, you skip the technical interview part. I interviewed for one American company once. Didn't like it despite the nice hotel. I also didn't get the job.
- bot41 6y ago

qppo 6y ago

Either end of the hiring channel is extremely noisy, recruiters work by spamming and candidates get seen by spamming. In my anecdotal experience, maybe 1 in 10 of any given job listing or applicant is worth pursuing. These questions are a less bad way of filtering people out than others. They're not the only filters used, and others have different tradeoffs. Sometimes if you're hitting these questions it's because the other filters have already excluded you.

21eleven 6y ago

That's true but then companies would have a problem where too many people still look qualified after going through rounds of interviews. If a given company has a lot of people who want to work for it then it makes sense for that company to have people attempt very challenging programming exercises so that the org can filter the applicant pool down to the number of positions they have open. These companies have the luxury of being able to have hiring processes that turn away perfectly good applicants that couldn't pass their tests (false negatives).

deadmutex 6y ago
> it makes sense for that company to have people attempt very challenging programming exercises Perhaps. I would also encourage companies to look past programming ability, and consider things like work ethic etc. I would argue that once you can do the job, reliably showing up and working hard every day has a lot of impact.
- phenkdo 6y ago
  I feel that is a false dichotomy: programming ability is strongly correlated with work ethic.
  - luckylion 6y ago
    Has that been studied? It doesn't match my experience, I saw them pretty unrelated.
- ksk 6y ago
  You are 100% correct. As a manager I would love to test for work ethic, honesty, being a team-player, etc. The problem is I can only infer those qualities based on signals that are inherently noisy. The only way you really know of those qualities is by working with them over a period of time. A solution to this is to hire through your network, especially via someone who has worked with the candidate. But that certainly limits your pool.
zinckiwi 6y ago

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]