4 ms·

Exactly, it's so sad hearing someone not realize that their hiring process is basically discriminatory in nature. Can you tell someone had the chops to figure t

by Kranar 5y ago

Exactly, it's so sad hearing someone not realize that their hiring process is basically discriminatory in nature. Can you tell someone had the chops to figure things out if they came from a different cultural background than one you're familiar with? If they had a different social upbringing from yours? If they presented themselves in a way that you personally misunderstood but someone else would have been completely comfortable with? Of course not, OP basically hired someone he got along with, and that's fine on a small scale, but it's not something to pride oneself over. A better approach in my opinion is if you find someone who you get along with, you think they have that kind of fire and passion you're looking for, but they don't know the basics and fundamentals of computer science nor are they familiar with data structures and algorithms, you advise them that if they want to make the most of their potential then they should take some minimal amount of time to really devote themselves to understanding those aspects and then they can reapply for the position at a later date. You can keep in touch with them, even potentially mentor them if you really think they are worth it, but you don't just give someone a pass. Letting someone get by without that knowledge because you like them doesn't really do anyone any favors.

giantg2 5y ago
"Exactly, it's so sad hearing someone not realize that their hiring process is basically discriminatory in nature." Yep. I've seen this so much in my company for performance review. It's completely subjective and managers dont even realize when they are discriminating or violating company policies (or laws!).
6gvONxR4sf7o 5y ago
> Exactly, it's so sad hearing someone not realize that their hiring process is basically discriminatory in nature. I've come to the sad conclusion that this is a fundamental tension. Ignoring the pre-interview filtering, our industry has, on one end of the spectrum, a relatively nondiscriminatory process that assumes basically nothing and tests you on as much of the field as they can before hiring. It's nondiscriminatory in that it doesn't matter where you come from as long as you can solve the same structured problems as everyone else. This is the whiteboard interview everyone hates, and it's not all that inclusive. On the other end of the spectrum, we have the fuzzy 'does this person seem like they could become capable quickly and work well with me' process. It's inclusive in that it doesn't require you to be able to solve those stupid problems yet, just be bright enough and hard working enough to learn. But it's not at all unbiased. So do you go for unbiased and give people the same standardized questions, or go for inclusive and have a real conversation? I've found the best people come from the latter process, but I would say that, right? I'm biased.
- Kranar 5y ago
  I agree there is tension and it's imperfect and I don't think one needs to go to one extreme or another... but GP literally said that they hired someone who didn't know "the first thing about programming" who took a single course on Java programming and just hired that person because they had the "chops and passion". That is what I am criticizing as not being helpful. If someone has the chops and passion for a job, they have the chops and passion to learn a few data structures and algorithms before interviewing for said job. Let them know it, keep in touch with them, and have them come back after they can tackle a proper technical interview. >I've found the best people come from the latter process, but I would say that, right? I'm biased. Right and that's a valid observation and there's nothing wrong with that bias per say. On the other hand I've found the opposite, the best software developers I currently have the pleasure of working with know their fundamental data structures and algorithms and have no trouble explaining deeply technical topics with rigor and precision, so that's what I hire for.
  - stuff4ben 5y ago
    It was a fresh college graduate, I don't expect them to know shit about software development honestly. What I do expect is for them to work hard and show passion for what they're doing and the learning process. I expect to see prior experience of self-motivation and hard work which is easily teased out in the interview process. This person became one of those legendary developers that could do the work of 3 without breaking a sweat. I interviewed tons of people from the same university with actual CS degrees and knowledge of data structures and algorithms. I actually hired lots of them and only a few were as competent as this person was. Your degrees and knowledge of a few data structures and algorithms mean nothing if you're lazy and don't show passion for what you're doing.
    - bradlys 5y ago
      That’s just confirmation bias on your part, my dude. You’re kinda glossing over the fact you took a chance and it worked out. How many times did you take chances like this on people? Probably not a lot. You likely hired the other folks not because they were passionate or had some quality you looked for in the other candidate but because they were clearly apt and able to do the job. I’d also say that there are many people out there that are incredibly intelligent, hardworking, knowledgeable, and just don’t give a single fuck about any business they work for. Most of my peers put me in that group. Don’t be bitter with us - we don’t find the shit challenging or appealing. A lot of us spent years in college grinding at rigorous academics and came out jaded. There’s relatively little left to learn compared to a starry eyed kid who took a single course, barely knows shit as you said, and is being given a once in a lifetime opportunity. Kid will leave and likely be jaded like the rest. It happens. Mentally, software is a horrible career.
jasonladuke0311 5y ago
> Exactly, it's so sad hearing someone not realize that their hiring process is basically discriminatory in nature. Leetcode and take-home assignments, to some degree, filter for younger people. I don't think too many people are going to solve two Leetcode hard questions in 45 minutes without some practice. I suspect this is a feature, not a bug, but I will take off my tinfoil hat now. Whether or not you like it, people want to work with people they think they will get along with. Someone can crush objective screens but maybe they come off as arrogant or potentially difficult to work with.
user_named 5y ago
The big tech hiring process discriminates in other ways. In fact every time you make a choice you by definition discriminate. I think your way of thinking or perhaps pretending that there are objective ways of making choices is a far bigger issue.

by Kranar 5y ago

giantg2 5y ago

"Exactly, it's so sad hearing someone not realize that their hiring process is basically discriminatory in nature." Yep. I've seen this so much in my company for performance review. It's completely subjective and managers dont even realize when they are discriminating or violating company policies (or laws!).

6gvONxR4sf7o 5y ago

> Exactly, it's so sad hearing someone not realize that their hiring process is basically discriminatory in nature. I've come to the sad conclusion that this is a fundamental tension. Ignoring the pre-interview filtering, our industry has, on one end of the spectrum, a relatively nondiscriminatory process that assumes basically nothing and tests you on as much of the field as they can before hiring. It's nondiscriminatory in that it doesn't matter where you come from as long as you can solve the same structured problems as everyone else. This is the whiteboard interview everyone hates, and it's not all that inclusive. On the other end of the spectrum, we have the fuzzy 'does this person seem like they could become capable quickly and work well with me' process. It's inclusive in that it doesn't require you to be able to solve those stupid problems yet, just be bright enough and hard working enough to learn. But it's not at all unbiased. So do you go for unbiased and give people the same standardized questions, or go for inclusive and have a real conversation? I've found the best people come from the latter process, but I would say that, right? I'm biased.

Kranar 5y ago
I agree there is tension and it's imperfect and I don't think one needs to go to one extreme or another... but GP literally said that they hired someone who didn't know "the first thing about programming" who took a single course on Java programming and just hired that person because they had the "chops and passion". That is what I am criticizing as not being helpful. If someone has the chops and passion for a job, they have the chops and passion to learn a few data structures and algorithms before interviewing for said job. Let them know it, keep in touch with them, and have them come back after they can tackle a proper technical interview. >I've found the best people come from the latter process, but I would say that, right? I'm biased. Right and that's a valid observation and there's nothing wrong with that bias per say. On the other hand I've found the opposite, the best software developers I currently have the pleasure of working with know their fundamental data structures and algorithms and have no trouble explaining deeply technical topics with rigor and precision, so that's what I hire for.
- stuff4ben 5y ago
  It was a fresh college graduate, I don't expect them to know shit about software development honestly. What I do expect is for them to work hard and show passion for what they're doing and the learning process. I expect to see prior experience of self-motivation and hard work which is easily teased out in the interview process. This person became one of those legendary developers that could do the work of 3 without breaking a sweat. I interviewed tons of people from the same university with actual CS degrees and knowledge of data structures and algorithms. I actually hired lots of them and only a few were as competent as this person was. Your degrees and knowledge of a few data structures and algorithms mean nothing if you're lazy and don't show passion for what you're doing.
  - bradlys 5y ago
    That’s just confirmation bias on your part, my dude. You’re kinda glossing over the fact you took a chance and it worked out. How many times did you take chances like this on people? Probably not a lot. You likely hired the other folks not because they were passionate or had some quality you looked for in the other candidate but because they were clearly apt and able to do the job. I’d also say that there are many people out there that are incredibly intelligent, hardworking, knowledgeable, and just don’t give a single fuck about any business they work for. Most of my peers put me in that group. Don’t be bitter with us - we don’t find the shit challenging or appealing. A lot of us spent years in college grinding at rigorous academics and came out jaded. There’s relatively little left to learn compared to a starry eyed kid who took a single course, barely knows shit as you said, and is being given a once in a lifetime opportunity. Kid will leave and likely be jaded like the rest. It happens. Mentally, software is a horrible career.

jasonladuke0311 5y ago

> Exactly, it's so sad hearing someone not realize that their hiring process is basically discriminatory in nature. Leetcode and take-home assignments, to some degree, filter for younger people. I don't think too many people are going to solve two Leetcode hard questions in 45 minutes without some practice. I suspect this is a feature, not a bug, but I will take off my tinfoil hat now. Whether or not you like it, people want to work with people they think they will get along with. Someone can crush objective screens but maybe they come off as arrogant or potentially difficult to work with.

user_named 5y ago

The big tech hiring process discriminates in other ways. In fact every time you make a choice you by definition discriminate. I think your way of thinking or perhaps pretending that there are objective ways of making choices is a far bigger issue.