4 ms·
He sucked at the job (made excuses for being behind on everything). Very good at interviewing.
by sorcerer-mar 1y ago
He sucked at the job (made excuses for being behind on everything). Very good at interviewing.
- dyauspitr 1y agoDoesn’t sound like it. A tweet says he’s was smart and likable and only let go because they found he was moonlighting. Another tweet says he was a really good coder.
- enraged_camel 1y agoThis isn't really true based on at least one account that is noted in the article: https://x.com/mprkhrst/status/1940443347581337925 https://x.com/mprkhrst/status/1940443347581337925 "Really smart and likable; enjoyed working with him" People generally don't enjoy working with people who suck at their job.
- whoknowsidont 1y ago>People generally don't enjoy working with people who suck at their job. That's news to me. Fabulous news even. Not sure when this change took place but it's for the better.
- sorcerer-mar 1y agoLet me rephrase: this would be interesting if he acquired and succeeded at several high-demand jobs. He did not. It is therefore not that interesting of a story.
- hardwaresofton 1y ago> It turns out that Parekh did quite well in many of these interviews and received offers, largely because he’s a gifted software engineer. > For instance, Rohan Pandey, a founding research engineer of the YC-backed startup Reworkd, told TechCrunch that he interviewed Parekh for a role and he was a strong candidate. Pandey, who is no longer with the startup, says Parekh was one of the top three performers on an algorithms-focused interview they gave candidates.
- sorcerer-mar 1y agoThat is exactly in line with what I just stated.