9 ms·

How (not) to apply for a software job

• landgenoot 3y ago
  Interesting to see that perfect grammar gives you penalties nowadays.
  • JetSetWilly 3y ago
    Need to improve the chatgpt prompt in canonical's case. "Include some personalised examples such as *paste author example". Don't have perfect grammar - allow the occasional mistake but not too prominently."
  • extasia 3y ago
    I suppose it's a bimodal distribution: very high effort and very low effort will both have near-perfect grammar, albeit for different reasons. Since the low effort applications dominate in volume, the discriminator learns perfect grammar to be a negative signal. Law of unintended consequences I guess.
  • benhoyt 3y ago
    It's not the "perfect grammar" that gets penalized (though ChatGPT grammar isn't really stellar). It's the part where the writing contains "little or nothing from the candidate's experience".
  • pell 3y ago
    At my job I have to write a lot of internal documentation and teaching material for teams to learn from. Since ChatGPT I've changed my writing style slightly because it often could be perceived as written by AI. It is comical that I'm now thinking twice about using certain phrases because they might mirror ChatGPT's writing characteristics. I am now even including different paragraph lengths because everyone is familiar with the way ChatGPT divides content.
    • Narciss 3y ago
      That is fascinating, isn't it? That we're tailoring our writing as a response to how an AI writes things.
  • sdflhasjd 3y ago
    It's not the grammar that's giving you penalties though, it's all the chaff that comes with using AI that you don't really want. Another issue with using AI is that you didn't write it, you're going to struggle to clarify any grandiose claims during an interview. I've come accross only a couple of these CVs before and I have to question what these candidates are expecting to happen. If you're going to write your own bullshit in you CV at least you can (try) to bullshit your way through the interview as well. If you're getting an AI to bullshit for you, you're going to be clueless in an interview.
  • mrkeen 3y ago
    One candidate could read: > they might have perfect grammar, but they’re incredibly boring, and they contain little or nothing from the candidate’s experience. and walk away with the impression that "perfect grammar gives you penalties". Another candidate might have interpreted it differently. Guess which candidate will get hired.
• daniel-s 3y ago
  Isn't Canonical famous for having one of the worst candidate selection processes? Also, there's a lot of superstition and nonsense about how to succeed at interviews and job applications.
  • mugivarra69 3y ago
    yes, fuck cannonical
  • tsak 3y ago
    I once applied for a job at Canonical. This was their process (roughly two years ago)... Thank you for applying for Software Engineer. The application process has several stages: - Initial screening (done) - Personal essay (this stage) - Culture interview - Standardised aptitude and personality tests - General interviews - Recruitment screen - Technical assessment - Role-specific interviews - Hiring manager interview - Executive interview The current stage is your personal essay. Please take some time to answer the questions below. We’re looking to get a sense of who you are, what’s important to you, and how you communicate. If you’ve already completed this when applying for another role, please feel free to copy/paste from your previous application. - Beginning in your high school years, through university and into your career, what have you done that you consider exceptional? - Why do you want to work for XYZ? - How are you involved in open source software? - What are your strengths as a software engineer? - Describe your experience as a Go software engineer. - Describe your experience with distributed systems.
    • GoToRO 3y ago
      From what you wrote, sounds like one of the best. At least it sounds better than most other interviews I had that were basically random.
      • deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
      • VonGallifrey 3y ago
        10 Steps are about 7 too many. Writing a Personal Essay after, what sounds like, an automated email is not something I would consider as a good interview process.
• notgoliath 3y ago
  Software engineers using tools like ChatGPT isn't really about trying to game the system. It's more about how out-of-touch the old-school job application process feels. We really just want to make things easier on ourselves. We're in a time where we're all about automating the boring stuff. Why? Because we can. The whole idea of writing a cover letter feels ancient. Honestly, when I'm shooting out a ton of job applications, it's a total drag to whip up a special cover letter for each one. Most of us are just trying to find a gig that matches what we can do and what we want to do. But nope, we gotta jump through all these hoops and write these fancy stories, even if no one's really reading them.
  • sheepshear 3y ago
    We toss out anything that looks written by AI.
    • notgoliath 3y ago
      That's so dumb. Dismissing applications based on the tools used rather than the content and qualifications is a missed opportunity. The goal should be to evaluate the substance and authenticity of an application, not to play "guess if it's AI-assisted or not." There's real talent out there looking for opportunities, and they might just be using AI to help navigate a convoluted application process.
      • sheepshear 3y ago
        I disagree but it doesn't matter because I'm sure we're not the only ones who do it. I'm just telling you what you're up against.
      • zeroCalories 3y ago
        You know job applications aren't checkboxes that need to be filled, but an opportunity to promote yourself? Sending in a cover letter that's obviously AI generated gives an employer so many negative signals about you. A good cover letter could be a single sentence, yet you choose to spam us with crap that says nothing about you? Are you struggling to say why we should hire you, or are you just stupid? Into the trash.
• ss1996 3y ago
  "but the written interview part (the part people seem to protest the most) I actually find quite useful." Yeah, not taking advice from this fellow. Good writing doesn't necessarily make you a good software engineer (and vice versa). Save this garbage for college applications.
  • yakshaving_jgt 3y ago
    It doesn’t necessarily make you one, but it’s a darn good indicator.
    • ss1996 3y ago
      How so? If it was, most novelist should be great software engineers. They are not.
      • yakshaving_jgt 3y ago
        This line of conversation has now become so nonsensical that I can only conclude you are arguing in bad faith. The act of writing fictitious narrative prose is obviously quite far removed from communicating technical ideas clearly and concisely. I think you know that.
      • yourad_io 3y ago
        Communication important
  • toyg 3y ago
    I mean, it's Canonical - they famously weigh high-school experience very heavily, so I guess them behaving like colleges is consistent (if slightly insane).
• tsak 3y ago
  I had this happen with an applicant recently, where they fed our job description into ChatGPT to generate a cover letter which was very non-descript and flowery, quoting phrases from the job spec verbatim which made it sound rather insane. Trying to give the candidate a chance, I asked them why they had a applied to the position in the hopes that they would write me a short answer about what piqued their interest. Alas they chose to use ChatGPT to generate that answer as well, hitting me with another wall of text of mindless bla bla bla.
  • melx 3y ago
    "Well, it sounds like they've mastered the art of 'Ctrl+C' and 'Ctrl+V'!" * * generated by ChatGPT itself
  • emerongi 3y ago
    > that they would write me a short answer about what piqued their interest Honest question: do people actually apply to jobs because it piques their interest? I pretty much just... need a job. I'll assess whether I want to join based almost purely on the team - if the team doesn't feel right, I'll skip. I don't apply for any jobs that require a cover letter. There's already enough information asymmetry and the effort required from the candidate is a lot higher than from the company as the company can distribute the work across multiple employees. A cover letter is a way to shift even more work to the candidate.
    • vineyardmike 3y ago
      I also don’t apply for jobs where I have to write a cover-letter. Last time I was laid off (when I was forced to find a new job), I applied in 2 pools - jobs that piqued my interests and jobs that paid me money so I can live. In the first group, when asked I could easily drone on about the interesting work they publish or whatever. The second group… I could scrap together a smile and a thin lie about how they’re a really impactful place based on what I learned from their homepage. When applying for jobs because I want a change, not because I need a salary, then yea it’s exclusively applications to interesting companies and teams.
• hp6 3y ago
  When you have a sub 1% chance of getting an interview, asking for a cover letter or some kind of non trivial time comitment is just wrong. IMHO a better approach would be to select lets say 10% of the candidates and ask only them.
  • deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  • yakshaving_jgt 3y ago
    If an applicant can’t take the time to write a cover letter — and by “cover letter” I just mean an email that’s says here’s who I am and here’s what I like/do — why should the person hiring take the time to read what the applicant has copied and pasted to countless other employers?
    • voidnap 3y ago
      > and by “cover letter” I just mean an email that’s says here’s who I am and here’s what I like/do This makes it sound like it would be something that would be "copied and pasted to countless other employers", just like a resume often is. But your last point made it sound like the applicant should invest more of their time than that. Conventionally, a good cover letter will be, at least to a degree, bespoke for that job. But that is a non-trivial time investment on the part of the applicant. And it can be a significant waste of time in cases where something on their resume disqualifies them from consideration regardless of their cover letter. Also, in the last several years, the impact of a good cover letter on getting an employment offer has diminished tremendously to the point that expect it of applicants isn't not respectful of their time.
      • yakshaving_jgt 3y ago
        > Also, in the last several years, the impact of a good cover letter on getting an employment offer has diminished tremendously to the point that expect it of applicants isn't not respectful of their time. Do you have anything to substantiate this claim? I'm an employer and I read and respond to dozens of applications when I have an open position. Usually when I receive an excellent application, the cover letter is roughly a paragraph in length. It isn't some lengthy, typeset file attachment with a mission statement or some other nonsense that would typically appear if you Googled "example cover letter". My thoughts on ideal job applications closely mirror those described here[0]. [0]: https://signalvnoise.com/posts/1748-forget-the-resume-kill-on-the-cover-letter https://signalvnoise.com/posts/1748-forget-the-resume-kill-o...
• pja 3y ago
  Canonical’s job application process is famously insane, so I wouldn’t personally put too much weight on anything in this blogpost.
• RockRobotRock 3y ago
  Indeed's PDF export resume looks great, in my opinion. It's the only thing that I use.
• silvestrov 3y ago
  When do employers get to "how to properly write a job advertisement"? All these articles are only about what workers should do, not how companies fail again and again at writing a good description of the job. E.g. "Describe your experience with software operations and running services in production" is a really bad question as it is too open ended and leads to name dropping. Asking for "engaging answers" judges the persons ability to write interesting novels instead of ability to solve (or avoid) problems. Ditto with “How would you approach the design and implementation of new features for a production service?”. This question is way too generic and a proper answer could fill many books. There is so many different ways of doing this and depends a lot on what the software is used for. When benhoyt says "In short, don’t be generic" then at least he could take his own advice into account when writing questions. An example response like "At Shopify [...] doubled click rate, from 15% to 27%" likely violate NDAs. I don't think companies like you to tell this to their competitor.
  • benhoyt 3y ago
    > When benhoyt says "In short, don’t be generic" then at least he could take his own advice into account when writing questions. I actually agree with this: I think several of our questions could be improved and made more specific. On the other hand, we do want them to be somewhat open-ended so the writer has to think and can put their best foot forward (or not). I don't write these questions, but I'll try to provide some feedback to those who do.
    • Kegenek 3y ago
      Wait am I tripping or aren’t you benhoyt? Kinda new to (at least commenting) on here.
      • benhoyt 3y ago
        The very same. To tell, you can click on my HN profile, which links to my website (where this article was published).
  • krisoft 3y ago
• deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
• noobermin 3y ago
  It's funny because I've read that details scare people, so you should avoid them. May be include something the employer likes (saved the employer 200K per year using xyz solution) but technical details? I guess it depends on who's reading.
  • zeroCalories 3y ago
    There is definitely a balance. When reviewing applications if I see that you used a bunch of technologies that I'm not familiar with, in my mind that counts for nothing. On the other hand, being too sparse also gives me few signals on whether you're a good candidate. IMO as a rule of thumb, adding details related to the job description is good. Otherwise, keep it broad enough that anyone in your field will know what you're talking about.
• rawbert 3y ago
  Am I the only one who is not maintaining some kind of private Github repo? I am doing this job for the money and not the "coding fun". If I had the urge to code more, I would just do more hours in my regular job and get paid for that.
  • morelisp 3y ago
    Most people will not get paid more for working more hours.
  • vineyardmike 3y ago
    Plenty of people code for fun. Or choose to spend free time learning new things. My job sometimes gets really boring and uninteresting. I can then scratch the itch by working on something for my own benefit and interest.
    • brabel 3y ago
      Yeah, I can't imagine only writing boring code at work and never getting to learn new, interesting things that could get me a role using those things that I actually enjoy using (now I am past that already, but I've done this all my career and would recommend unless you don't care at all about enjoying your job).
  • emerongi 3y ago
    I think none of my coworkers in different jobs have had Github profiles with public code. I have a Github profile with multiple public repos, but I don't think it helps with anything. I once had an interviewer say "it seems like you don't have much on your Github profile".
    • cmcaleer 3y ago
      > I once had an interviewer say "it seems like you don't have much on your Github profile". This sounds like a softball question to invite you to talk about your projects phrased in a slightly ignorant way, possibly on purpose. If you had quality projects on your GitHub this should be an extremely easy statement to answer with "I disagree because x and I'm particularly proud of y and its popularity with n users and feel that it demonstrates skills z". It's a perfectly fine way get a chance to state the value you demonstrate on your GitHub. I'd have no problem with getting this.
• gregorvand 3y ago
  What's sad is that the 'ChatGPT example' answers also mirror those that came via recruiter-edited CV's, before ChatGPT
• jurassic 3y ago
  The OP seems to think we should approach cover letters with the same care as if we were writing the great American novel. I disagree. They are meant to be somewhat canned, but a good one will efficiently direct the reviewers attention to the parts of your resume which are most relevant to the job and give the impression that you are specifically interested in the role. This is a task generative AI can accomplish with appropriate direction. Obviously a generic prompt is going to get a generic response, but if you put in the work to create a prompt with adequate context and descriptions of what you specifically want then I've seen it produce output that is a reasonably good starting place. If you don't want it using overly flowery, weirdly deferential language and copying specific phrases from the job description then you can address that by including those instructions in the prompt: "Be concise. Use a confident and conversational tone, and avoid using specific phrases from the job description." The problem is most people aren't going to spend 20-30 minutes creating a really customized prompt. But people who can't write a good prompt probably also weren't going to handcraft a great letter either. Mainly because of the investment of time it requires to create a fully bespoke piece of writing by hand for each place you want to apply. Another thing I want to mention is that it seems that many people don't realize yet that if you don't like the initial output you can give feedback and ask for revisions. E.g. "Can you make it shorter", "Eliminate flowery adjectives", etc or even just "Can you show me some different variations of this letter?" If you're writing a lot of these, it's worth putting in 20 minutes or so to make a prompt that creates output that doesn't suck but which you can easily reuse for other companies and roles with minor tweaks.
• GoToRO 3y ago
  All of this also aplies to job ads. What stood out for me was this: "Don’t use flowery prose" Most job ads out there are flowery prose. So I went and checked their careers page. Surprised me to see that they tell you pretty clear what you will do on your job.
• olliej 3y ago
  Something that I really need to emphasize is tailor your CV to every job. If you're apply to a job that's targeting C/C++/rust/low-level take any python (or similar) and either don't include them or, if what you were using them for was relevant to the job itself coalesce them. If you're applying to a job that involves creative work, make sure to include creative projects, but if you're not then just have a sentence in your "about me" synopsis at most. Your CV/resume should fit on a single page. Priority should be to things that are directly relevant to the job you're applying for. If it's not your first job your uni grades don't matter, just the qualifications, and the more real experience you have the less relevant those are - unless you're an international hire and a work visa will be needed, in that case more or less all countries just have hard "you must have this degree or equivalent" requirements. Include information about what you actual did, not what project/product you worked on. I've read many CVs that make it actively hard to determine whether interviewing is worthwhile: lots of pages isn't impressive, all it means I'm more likely to miss info that would make you compelling. Similarly buzzwords aren't impressive they should only be present in significant amounts if you're think you're dealing with recruiter BS.
  • deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
• dcminter 3y ago
  What objective methods do you use to determine that you're keeping the right people and rejecting the right people? I'd love one of these companies to actually hire a control group some time instead of just assuming "well, I like the people I hired so they must be good" and then pontificating about it.
• ayhanfuat 3y ago
  Another arbitrary set of tips for the perfect resume. It provides zero evidence that this selection process results in better candidates. None of the perfect resume guides does that. What they do instead is list a bunch of personal preferences and try to justify them because they are blinded by their position. Did you really make a better job than randomly eliminating 90% of the applications? Who knows.
• 22289d 3y ago
  A common phenomenon in the age of ChatGPT. Making the mistake of thinking you can spot AI writing because you can spot bad AI writing. You're only spotting the bad. The good you think is real. Some of the best cover letters and answers the author reads were probably written with the assistance of AI. The key to using AI to write better is: 'with the assistance of'. You don't write a prompt, get a bunch of text and copy paste it. Instead, you use AI to help you, as basically a spellchecker on steroids that can accept commands to do anything. One example is where the author mentions non-native English speakers. They can use AI to turn their broken English into exactly what they said but with perfect grammar, formatting, spelling and punctuation - and sprinkle in some thesaurus help and rewording here and there. They can even get some ideas for making the tone witty or serious or professional or funny. Key there is 'ideas'. Don't copy paste, use it to help.
  • sjducb 3y ago
    Yea. I mostly write a first draft and tell AI to improve it. It keeps all of the content I put in, but the writing is much better than what I did.
  • SamuelAdams 3y ago
    Yeah I think this general hatred towards AI is weird. Should we also not use Google to solve problems because it sometimes returns bad results? Should we not use autocomplete in our IDE of choice because it sometimes selects the wrong method? AI is a tool just like any other, and it is here to stay. Learn to embrace it.
• pacMakaveli 3y ago
  This article is so shit. I recently been on the lookout for a new job and my first CV was personal. Full of my own words and description of what I did in the last 10+ years as a software engineer. I'm a bit biased but it was a really good CV. That got me 0 fucking offers. ZERO I rewrote my CV based on some google suggestions and with ChatGPT. I got through for every single job I applied ( 10+ ) and even received offers, finally landing a new role. Stop talking shit.
  • emerongi 3y ago
    I think if your resume goes through HR or automated filters first, they will filter out any personalized CVs. It would need to land directly on the table of an engineer for it to be appreciated.
  • yakshaving_jgt 3y ago
    I wonder how differently this comment would have read if you had fed it through ChatGPT first.
• pacMakaveli 3y ago
  This article is so frustrating. Get yourself on the market before spewing this shit. I recently been on the lookout for a new job and my first CV was personal. Full of my own words and description of what I did in the last 10+ years as a software engineer. I'm a bit biased but it was a really good CV. That got me 0 fucking offers. ZERO I rewrote my CV based on some google suggestions and with ChatGPT. I got through next stage on every single job I applied ( 10+ ) and even received offers, finally landing a new role. Stop talking shit.
  • brabel 3y ago
    I have the impression that for each recruiter with the same opinions as the OP, there's 10 that love bullshit and flowery prose and will discard anything that sounds like a simple developer writing about what he's been doing in a more realistic tone.
  • loloquwowndueo 3y ago
    Mod parent up!!
  • loloquwowndueo 3y ago
    Care to share the google suggestions? :)
  • sjducb 3y ago
    Yea you 100% need a skills section that lists every technology you’ve ever worked with. I tried taking it off and got no interviews with that CV version. Someone in HR or a recruiter will match up the technologies on the job post with your CV and only put you through if you list most of the ones they need.
    • john-radio 3y ago
      I never know how granular to go with those.
      • shrikant 3y ago
• schlowmo 3y ago
  > Don’t use flowery prose. I find this advice kind of ironic. The most people I know don't use flowery prose in their cover letters because they consider themselves some kind of overachieving artists, but because it appears to be expected. Writing cover letters is bullshitting time, although this is probably country/culture dependent. Fortunately I didn't have to write an applciation for a long time, but reading my own old applications gives me the chills, even though I got invited to an interview almost every single time. If you don't want flowery prose, you have to set the expectation when writing the job posting. If your job posting appears to be written by your PR department you get cover letters written by your applicants personal PR departments. Or in other words: bullshit me in the job description and I will bullshit you in my cover letter. This behavior is reinforced if you don't make it clear who will gonna read my application first. If I get the impression that my application will land on a desk of a hiring manager who doesn't know much about the job I might turn the BS to 11. If you communicate clearly that the person reading the application first knows what you are really looking for, I'll dial down.
  • intelVISA 3y ago
    Maybe I'm in the minority but I enjoy writing flowery prose for industry, it's like wearing your LLM (bs generator) hat for a day and embelishing "pushed keyboard to generate outsized impact" into "devised novel lock-free distibuted supercompute fabric for 9485% YoY agile spaghetti reduction vs. k8s in multi cloud native value add" I like to think HR starts sweating at how quickly they can get me in and the EM rolls their eyes a full 360.
• moron4hire 3y ago
  I'm about convinced that writing a resume that can get passed the automated filtering and still read well is an impossible task.
• lapcat 3y ago
  > I work for Canonical "Canonical’s recruitment process is long and complex" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37059857 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37059857
• cjg 3y ago
  The author believes that rejecting candidates that fail in these ways will lead to hiring better employees, but I see nothing to say why that should be so.
• dangus 3y ago
  > There’s nothing interesting or personal, and it could describe almost any software engineer. Do you not want a software engineer? I’m applying for a job that I have to have to survive, not my life’s ultimate passion. If you don’t want me to use automation to aid my workflow (which in this case is to apply to hundreds of jobs knowing that my chances at each individual one are slim) then you’ll get what you’re asking for: employees who are stupid enough to waste their time on menial, low-value tasks like cover letters for job applications that have a 99%+ reject rate. For hiring managers lamenting the fact that our resumes don’t stand out, maybe you should be scolded for your jobs not standing out. What do special about working for canonical? Let me guess, you write software that transforms inputs to outputs on a deadline. My bad for my cover letter on that subject being “boring.” It’s not the applicant’s job to be worried about the difficulty of your screening process. If you don’t want to sift through flowery cover letters, stop asking for them. Also, it’s your job to sift through applications, not our job to tailor our applications for your individual preferences. You’re just one fish in the sea.
  • emerongi 3y ago
    > Let me guess, you write software that transforms inputs to outputs on a deadline. Software engineering described by a software engineer, love it!
• jgil 3y ago
  The author contradicts their own advice to avoid flowery prose, “show don’t tell”, and to use “nothing but words” — they frequently use italics and punctuation for added emphasis. The criticisms seem pedantic, given that many job postings might fail the writing bar suggested by the post. How would applicants know that the writing style in a posting is unacceptable in their submission? Re:business jargon — the example of “actionable insights” that was derided as meaningless merely lacks specificity. It provides more information about a candidate’s prior role. Are they building dashboards with summary stats, or expected to propose strategy based on research? Not knowing business jargon doesn't prove that the jargon itself has no meaning. What do people think of the language in the job below, evaluated using the criteria in the post? https://canonical.com/careers/4348076 https://canonical.com/careers/4348076
  • benhoyt 3y ago
    > The author contradicts their own advice to avoid flowery prose Can you give some examples of where I use flowery prose in the article (apart from when quoting samples that do)? It's something I try hard to avoid.
• loloquwowndueo 3y ago
  He forgot the part where the most important section of the “written interview” is about your high school years, because Mark Shuttleworth blindly and erroneously believes it’s a good predictor of what kind of person you are and how you will do at Canonical. Never mind that as has been said many times, this is about hiring the current “you” and not high-school “you” which may well have happened 30 years ago.
• Joel_Mckay 3y ago
  From time to time, I volunteer with friends and local grads to find positions out of simple annoyance with the ecosystem. I suspect the reason things look generic is staffing-agents (and data mining scammers) will often post/farm-lead a genetic description of nonexistent positions, than spam the inbox of HR people when a request for applicants is posted. There are many reasons this happens, few are related directly to building a team. For example, the non-vite job posting some unions, faculties, and work-visa-sponsors must post on public lists by law. These are often so overly specific one could name the single applicant out of 200k CVs. The posters sometimes just want to document time/details with a few applicants to prove on paper they had no option other than hire a specific worker they wanted in the first place. There are great companies out there that need help building interesting projects. You probably don’t want to work someplace where the process is deceptive, punitive and or humiliating... even with low-stakes conversations about project staffing. Production programmers/engineers are busy people, and often don’t give a toss about making things aesthetically pleasing for laypersons. For example, they would ignore an article written by chatGPT criticizing chatGPT with 62% certainty. Good luck, =)
• stuckkeys 3y ago
  Whoever wrote the article must be fun to work with.
• siva7 3y ago
  I applied twice at Canonical. Got both times an automated mail where they proudly pronounced how superior and more human their interview process is and that i will definitely receive a follow-up. Both times i've been ghosted. So therefore let me give some advice to the blog author: Before (or instead of) giving out generic advice to job candidates, try to be a bit more humble about the (broken) reality at Canonical.
  • fmajid 3y ago
    I've been through the hiring process at Canonical 6 months ago (wringer would be a more accurate term), all the way to 4 interviews with Mark Shuttleworth and an offer for a Director level position. I ended up passing because I didn't want to manage in a 100% remote distributed culture, and to be perfectly honest with myself a senior IC position was more suited to my personality than a managerial one. I think their process is intense but fair, and I believe them when they say they try hard to rid themselves of bias. I'd ditch the psychometric tests, but will give them the benefit of doubt when they say it correlates with job performance (Google's also made that claim before). Given how many people apply for jobs at Canonical, it's to be expected there is a high level of attrition, and quite possible small errors in the resume or application end up disqualifying your application, specially for more junior hobs. I can understand your disappointment, but they can only work based on what you've sent them.
    • siva7 3y ago
      My criticisms is directed at ghosting candidates for a company claiming they will do otherwise. That shouldn't depend on "quite possible small errors in the resume or application". Both were senior roles. They were also the only company doing this from all those i applied for.
    • deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
• yosito 3y ago
  How not to apply for a software job: applying at places where the interviewer is pedantic and evaluating you on things that are subjective and literally have nothing to do with your ability to perform the job. This article is worthless.
• allo37 3y ago
  Engineers prefer direct language and concrete examples. Unfortunately it's not always engineers looking at your resumé, and they love buzzwords and flowery language.
• loloquwowndueo 3y ago
  Fun how he advocates for not using AI on your resume when applying at Canonical, never mind the fact that Canonical’s Glassdoor page is full of astroturfed, blatantly AI-generated 5-star reviews.
• fred_is_fred 3y ago
  If people at any company should refrain from giving job application advice it's people working for Canonical.
• bluenomatterwho 3y ago
  I used the new AI assisted LinkedIn summary and it had all the usual buzzwords I can't stand either but, alongside things like company 'culture' (we're a family here) it looked to me to be the kind of vapid and saccharine paragraph that presents the corporate image we 'want' to present. I thought hey, at least I didn't have to write it.
• okaleniuk 3y ago
  I lead a small R&D team in Materialise's Kyiv office. Due to very demanding requirements (we need someone who can do math, write code, and communicate with other people reasonably well, often at the same time), I usually have to read somewhere between 50 to 100 resumes per hire. And one thing is absolutely certain - there is an inverse correlation between the quality of the resume and the quality of the candidate. People in high demand don't have, nor should they have, the skill to write resumes. That's the skill that people who can't get a job naturally develop. The other thing, a bad resume often protects you from bad employers. Take this passage from the post: "When candidates first started (obviously) using AI for their applications, I would rule them out for “cheating”" - that's... incredibly stupid. You don't want to work for or with stupid people so I think all the ruled-out people dodged a bullet here. One reason I joined Materialise was that the recruiter used my LinkedIn profile at the interview instead of asking for a resume. Didn't waste their own time, didn't waste mine. That's smart. I want to work with smart people. I'm in.
  • vlod 3y ago
    >was that the recruiter used my LinkedIn profile at the interview instead of asking for a resume I have never seen this. Most of the time, not only do they not look at your linkedin profile (because like it's usually a reflection of the CV), they want you to fill in a custom built 'Resume builder' on their 2000 era site. As you can imagine, this is as crap as can be and doesn't work correctly. I just give up at this point.
• carlotte 3y ago
  [dead]
• Jecintaworld 3y ago
  [flagged]
• Anya200 3y ago
  [dead]