4 ms·

I'm married. I have children ages 4, 6, 7, 9, 10. I don't really have much extra time. I have many side projects. I don't watch TV. I don't play games. In

I'm married. I have children ages 4, 6, 7, 9, 10. I don't really have much extra time. I have many side projects. I don't watch TV. I don't play games. In my very limited spare time, if I don't have pressing household chores/repairs/bills/errands/etc then I build software projects, work on home IT stuff, and read the occasional book. If I can do it, almost anyone who really wants to can. These things aren't mutually exclusive. Some days I just can't, I'm fried after work, and then I just hang out with the family.

ctvo 4y ago
> I don't watch TV. I don't play games. In my very limited spare time, if I don't have pressing household chores I build software projects, work on home IT stuff, and read the occasional book. These things aren't mutually exclusive. Great. Two of the most common hobbies for everyone else is excluded so you have enough time to do side projects (TV here includes streaming service shows, sport broadcasts, etc.). How is this not reinforcing the idea that this purity test excludes many engineers?
- BackBlast 4y ago
  Of course it excludes people. Some of those excluded are good people. The claim isn't made that it's some perfect process where no stone is left unturned.
  - ctvo 4y ago
    No, the claim is it's a better way to hire "Good Engineers", because what's the point of a method that isn't better than the current standard of white boarding, which we know also excludes people, but has also identified "Good Engineers". This is where data would be helpful, and why numerous people have pointed out that bringing code you wrote, IP owned by your previous employer is a no go, and why we've goal post moved instead to bringing in your personal projects.
    - BackBlast 4y ago
      It's not a goal post move. The article is explicit about the origin being from personally owned code if necessary. > If they don't have code to share for whatever reason, like it is owned by their previous employer or they are fresh out of school with no code to show, pass on them. > You have other code to share? Data would be helpful, but I don't even know how such data would be gathered. Is there a sure-fire method to identify a "Good Engineer" from one who is not? I interview occasionally, been working a long time. The numbers of devs I know that have such code to share is small, and I would put them all in the work-with-again bucket. I'm not sure if I would adopt this method, but I've seen worse filters :)
- quinnjh 4y ago
  At the risk of being that guy, is the _entire purpose_ of the interview process not to exclude engineers , or conduct a purity test? Surely the most bias free way to hire would be to say yes to the first applicant. Of course this excludes engineers who are busy and were not able to apply first... so perhaps the randomth applicant gets sent a "youre hired". I mean. Hey maybe its a better process. We have yet to see some metrics on this.
totallyblasted 4y ago
Do you include movies as tv or just idle watching or show watching?
sg47 4y ago
Looks like you don't spend time with your children either

ctvo 4y ago

> I don't watch TV. I don't play games. In my very limited spare time, if I don't have pressing household chores I build software projects, work on home IT stuff, and read the occasional book. These things aren't mutually exclusive. Great. Two of the most common hobbies for everyone else is excluded so you have enough time to do side projects (TV here includes streaming service shows, sport broadcasts, etc.). How is this not reinforcing the idea that this purity test excludes many engineers?

BackBlast 4y ago
Of course it excludes people. Some of those excluded are good people. The claim isn't made that it's some perfect process where no stone is left unturned.
- ctvo 4y ago
  No, the claim is it's a better way to hire "Good Engineers", because what's the point of a method that isn't better than the current standard of white boarding, which we know also excludes people, but has also identified "Good Engineers". This is where data would be helpful, and why numerous people have pointed out that bringing code you wrote, IP owned by your previous employer is a no go, and why we've goal post moved instead to bringing in your personal projects.
  - BackBlast 4y ago
    It's not a goal post move. The article is explicit about the origin being from personally owned code if necessary. > If they don't have code to share for whatever reason, like it is owned by their previous employer or they are fresh out of school with no code to show, pass on them. > You have other code to share? Data would be helpful, but I don't even know how such data would be gathered. Is there a sure-fire method to identify a "Good Engineer" from one who is not? I interview occasionally, been working a long time. The numbers of devs I know that have such code to share is small, and I would put them all in the work-with-again bucket. I'm not sure if I would adopt this method, but I've seen worse filters :)
quinnjh 4y ago
At the risk of being that guy, is the _entire purpose_ of the interview process not to exclude engineers , or conduct a purity test? Surely the most bias free way to hire would be to say yes to the first applicant. Of course this excludes engineers who are busy and were not able to apply first... so perhaps the randomth applicant gets sent a "youre hired". I mean. Hey maybe its a better process. We have yet to see some metrics on this.

totallyblasted 4y ago

Do you include movies as tv or just idle watching or show watching?

sg47 4y ago

Looks like you don't spend time with your children either