3 ms·

> if you are personally interested in the work, willing to learn, and aren't a jerk, you'll probably go further than someone who has traveling salesman memorize

by hiq 6y ago

> if you are personally interested in the work, willing to learn, and aren't a jerk, you'll probably go further than someone who has traveling salesman memorized in 8 languages. I'm not sure how you test the first three qualities reliably in an interview. The point of leetcode interviews is that they are arguably harder to game: if you manage to write some code solving some problem, you at least memorized a solution and somewhat understood it. Maybe you trust engineers to be completely transparent, but then you also let in a different kind of "brilliant jerk" (as you put it) who learnt to fake interest.

goatcode 5y ago
>if you manage to write some code solving some problem, you at least memorized a solution and somewhat understood it Or got someone else to do it for you. I think you underestimate the skill of interviewers. You can learn a lot about a person from one directed conversation, if you want to.
- hiq 5y ago
  > Or got someone else to do it for you. I assume you're talking about cheating? That's mostly possible for remote interviews, not that easy to pull off. > I think you underestimate the skill of interviewers. You can learn a lot about a person from one directed conversation, if you want to. You can definitely learn a lot, but the three qualities you mentioned were: > interested in the work, willing to learn, and aren't a jerk If someone wants the job because of $REASONS that differ from these, they can still practice to show these traits during the interview. You could dig deeper in their portfolio if they have one, but my point is that the 1h interview is not going to bring you much more with respect to these three criteria you mentioned.
  - goatcode 5y ago
    >can still practice to show these traits during the interview. Many can, but over time that practice itself becomes evident to a good interviewer. No process is perfect, nor can it be. But, that a few can slip through doesn't mean that all can, or do.

by hiq 6y ago

goatcode 5y ago

>if you manage to write some code solving some problem, you at least memorized a solution and somewhat understood it Or got someone else to do it for you. I think you underestimate the skill of interviewers. You can learn a lot about a person from one directed conversation, if you want to.

hiq 5y ago
> Or got someone else to do it for you. I assume you're talking about cheating? That's mostly possible for remote interviews, not that easy to pull off. > I think you underestimate the skill of interviewers. You can learn a lot about a person from one directed conversation, if you want to. You can definitely learn a lot, but the three qualities you mentioned were: > interested in the work, willing to learn, and aren't a jerk If someone wants the job because of $REASONS that differ from these, they can still practice to show these traits during the interview. You could dig deeper in their portfolio if they have one, but my point is that the 1h interview is not going to bring you much more with respect to these three criteria you mentioned.
- goatcode 5y ago
  >can still practice to show these traits during the interview. Many can, but over time that practice itself becomes evident to a good interviewer. No process is perfect, nor can it be. But, that a few can slip through doesn't mean that all can, or do.