4 ms·

But the ability to problem solve complicated problems where the obvious solution is probably not the best one. Problems like designing "the most popular packag

by vanusa 5y ago

But the ability to problem solve complicated problems where the obvious solution is probably not the best one. Problems like designing "the most popular package manager on macOS", for example? I think what the author finds strange is that not only do many people still believe that LC (or whiteboarding) are effective proxies for general problem solving ability -- they seem to tacitly believe they are better measures than demonstrated, real-world problem solving achievements. Even problems that are significantly more multifaceted and nuanced. If it is wrong, it's working pretty darn well [for MANGA]. The problem is, these tests (and extensive rounds of them, with onerous time limits) are used by companies that (inasmuch as they would like to believe otherwise) definitely are not MANGA and certainly are not offering MANGA levels of compensation.

TulliusCicero 5y ago
> Problems like designing "the most popular package manager on macOS", for example? Yes, those fall through the gaps, but people with that kind of extremely strong, publicly viewable history are much more the exception than the norm.
- vanusa 5y ago
  Does have to be not just "strong" -- but "extremely strong" evidence? Not to split hairs - but it does seem to be a peculiar choice of words, there. I just don't see why the DSA filter has come to be considered so golden that one's ability to not just demonstrate some baseline capacity for this skillset, but to positively master a sequence of concocted performative rituals around it (specifically: reciting these algorithms in front of groups of strangers at a whiteboard; "talking" large blocks of code to someone over a phone; or doing online tests under completely unrealistic time pressure) -- that, in some corners at least, has come to categorically dominate all other selection criteria in the hiring process. (Actually I do see why -- but it all comes down to factors not related to the intrinsic importance of these skills, or to whether the candidate can effectively do the job).
  - TulliusCicero 5y ago
    > Not to split hairs - but it does seem to be a peculiar choice of words, there. Perhaps not; I think the "publicly viewable" part is going to the sticking point, most of the time. Most people don't have significant/impressive side projects that they can show off to prospective employers, their work is at prior companies. Anyway, I can see why DSA interviews are popular. IIRC studies show IQ tests and work sample tests are two of the most effective interviewing techniques, and algorithmic whiteboard coding splits the difference between the two, and does so in a way that's relatively platform/stack-agnostic. Especially useful since IQ tests themselves are of dubious legality.
    - vanusa 5y ago
      Yeah, that's what I see it as -- in part as a quick stand-in for a higher-end IQ test (or whatever of one wants to call "innate" intellectual ability). As well a way for the company to signal that of course they're all of very high innate intelligence themselves, and they know how to test you for it, too (by asking you to do what amounts to a few carefully rehearsed parlor tricks). And lastly, as a cathartic bonding ritual: "You went in on this high-pressure, slightly (or sometimes very) humiliating performance rite with us together and it looks like you've passed! Or at least it seems now you do not have completely damaged DNA. Now we are ready to forgive and accept each other as equals, or some approximation thereof."
      - TulliusCicero 5y ago
        > by asking you to do what amounts to a few carefully rehearsed parlor tricks Nah. Parlor tricks would be the old riddle questions about manhole covers and light bulbs being warm. It's difficult to gain competency in algorithmic whiteboarding questions without being smart and at least half decent at coding. They're not perfect gateway questions, but most of the alternative suggestions I've heard here or on Reddit are worse. > And lastly, as a cathartic bonding ritual: "You went in on this high-pressure, slightly (or sometimes very) humiliating performance rite with us together and it looks like you've passed! Or at least it seems now you do not have completely damaged DNA. Now we are ready to forgive and accept each other as equals, or some approximation thereof." Having worked at Amazon and Google, I really don't see this. People bond over other parts of the company culture, but the entry process, not really. I guess people do talk about the painful Google recruiting process, but that's mostly how fucking long and drawn out it is, people don't seem to really mind the questions themselves overmuch.

by vanusa 5y ago

TulliusCicero 5y ago

> Problems like designing "the most popular package manager on macOS", for example? Yes, those fall through the gaps, but people with that kind of extremely strong, publicly viewable history are much more the exception than the norm.

vanusa 5y ago
Does have to be not just "strong" -- but "extremely strong" evidence? Not to split hairs - but it does seem to be a peculiar choice of words, there. I just don't see why the DSA filter has come to be considered so golden that one's ability to not just demonstrate some baseline capacity for this skillset, but to positively master a sequence of concocted performative rituals around it (specifically: reciting these algorithms in front of groups of strangers at a whiteboard; "talking" large blocks of code to someone over a phone; or doing online tests under completely unrealistic time pressure) -- that, in some corners at least, has come to categorically dominate all other selection criteria in the hiring process. (Actually I do see why -- but it all comes down to factors not related to the intrinsic importance of these skills, or to whether the candidate can effectively do the job).
- TulliusCicero 5y ago
  > Not to split hairs - but it does seem to be a peculiar choice of words, there. Perhaps not; I think the "publicly viewable" part is going to the sticking point, most of the time. Most people don't have significant/impressive side projects that they can show off to prospective employers, their work is at prior companies. Anyway, I can see why DSA interviews are popular. IIRC studies show IQ tests and work sample tests are two of the most effective interviewing techniques, and algorithmic whiteboard coding splits the difference between the two, and does so in a way that's relatively platform/stack-agnostic. Especially useful since IQ tests themselves are of dubious legality.
  - vanusa 5y ago
    Yeah, that's what I see it as -- in part as a quick stand-in for a higher-end IQ test (or whatever of one wants to call "innate" intellectual ability). As well a way for the company to signal that of course they're all of very high innate intelligence themselves, and they know how to test you for it, too (by asking you to do what amounts to a few carefully rehearsed parlor tricks). And lastly, as a cathartic bonding ritual: "You went in on this high-pressure, slightly (or sometimes very) humiliating performance rite with us together and it looks like you've passed! Or at least it seems now you do not have completely damaged DNA. Now we are ready to forgive and accept each other as equals, or some approximation thereof."
    - TulliusCicero 5y ago
      > by asking you to do what amounts to a few carefully rehearsed parlor tricks Nah. Parlor tricks would be the old riddle questions about manhole covers and light bulbs being warm. It's difficult to gain competency in algorithmic whiteboarding questions without being smart and at least half decent at coding. They're not perfect gateway questions, but most of the alternative suggestions I've heard here or on Reddit are worse. > And lastly, as a cathartic bonding ritual: "You went in on this high-pressure, slightly (or sometimes very) humiliating performance rite with us together and it looks like you've passed! Or at least it seems now you do not have completely damaged DNA. Now we are ready to forgive and accept each other as equals, or some approximation thereof." Having worked at Amazon and Google, I really don't see this. People bond over other parts of the company culture, but the entry process, not really. I guess people do talk about the painful Google recruiting process, but that's mostly how fucking long and drawn out it is, people don't seem to really mind the questions themselves overmuch.