4 ms·

Not really comparable... the overwhelming majority of flight tests involve flying an aircraft. There is no meaningful way someone can be excellent at flying an

by Maxatar 4mo ago

Not really comparable... the overwhelming majority of flight tests involve flying an aircraft. There is no meaningful way someone can be excellent at flying an aircraft but can't pass a test which involves flying an aircraft. The same can't be said for many other tests. If the test involves the practical application of the very skill being tested, then that test has direct relevance to he competency of said skill. But many other tests are not like that. A teacher can be brilliant in the classroom yet stumble on a standardized certification exam full of pedagogical jargon. A chef can cook a variety of excellent dishes but fail a written culinary theory exam testing the French names of techniques they perform by instinct. And perhaps more relevant to this audience, a coding interview that relies on whiteboarding algorithms from memory can easily fail an excellent engineer who builds great software every day but doesn't recall the optimal solution to some puzzle on the spot.

WalterBright 4mo ago
They are never going to let you into a cockpit until you pass ground school, which involves a lot of math. > A teacher can be brilliant in the classroom yet stumble on a standardized certification exam full of pedagogical jargon. A teacher that cannot explain how calculus works cannot teach it to anybody. > a coding interview that relies on whiteboarding algorithms from memory can easily fail an excellent engineer who builds great software every day but doesn't recall the optimal solution to some puzzle on the spot. I've seen too many coders using bubble sort because they don't know enough to look for a better algorithm. In any case, the purpose of leet coding tests is to quickly filter out the utter frauds. I have a programmer friend who wanted a job at a major software corp. He knew he'd have to pass the leetcode in an early stage of the interviewing. He figured it would take 6 weeks or so to study that material. I suggested that, since he was applying for a $250K job, that would be the most productive studying he'd ever done. He agreed, did the 6 weeks of studying, aced the leetcode test, and got the $250K. So ya, there is a point to those tests, in filtering out the frauds and the ones who aren't willing to do what it takes to get those jobs.
- Maxatar 4mo ago
  This has to be a joke... Ground school most certainly does not involve a lot of math, it's not like there's any calculus or algebra involved... it's basic arithmetic. Furthermore it's categorically false that you need to pass ground school before you're allowed to fly. Are you just making things up? >A teacher that cannot explain how calculus works cannot teach it to anybody. This is a strawman argument, I never made anything that could even remotely be interpreted as this. >I've seen too many coders using bubble sort because they don't know enough to look for a better algorithm. This is committing a very basic logical fallacy. The fact that someone who is incompetent likely can't pass a test is not the same claim as someone who can't pass a test is likely incompetent. Hopefully you are able to identify this logical mistake that you're committing and revise your position accordingly.
  - WalterBright 4mo ago
    > categorically false Google sez: "The U.S. Air Force strictly requires you to complete and pass formal academic ground training before you ever touch the controls of an aircraft" They're not going to risk an aircraft on an incompetent student. > A teacher can be brilliant in the classroom yet stumble on a standardized certification exam full of pedagogical jargon I stand by my statement. > logical fallacy A implies B meaning B implies A is indeed a logical fallacy. But that does not rule out B implies A. A and B can be strongly related to each other.
    - Maxatar 4mo ago
      So you are making things up... thanks for confirming that. While I appreciate that you reviewed what Google "sez"... you have misunderstood the relevant context which is that the U.S. Air Force also requires that you complete Initial Flight Training (IFT) before you start the Air Force's own formal training program (UPT). In IFT you will not be required to pass ground school before you get to fly. Furthermore, even if the Air Force did not require IFT before UPT (the Air Force's own training program), you've completely changed the nature of your argument. I have no dispute about whether the Air Force may or may not have stricter requirements for their pilots, but that wasn't your argument. >I stand by my statement. You've proudly planted your flag on a point nobody was contesting, which is a strange hill to celebrate on but you do you. >But that does not rule out B implies A. A and B can be strongly related to each other. Discussing a topic with someone who not only uses logically fallacies as justification for their argument but brazenly doubles down on said fallacy is a good sign that this is probably not a good discussion to continue spending time on. Like am I supposed to simply accept your logical fallacy and take on the burden of disproving every claim you can dream up simply because you've asserted it isn't logically impossible? The person making the claim carries the burden of supporting it, and "they're strongly related" is something you have to actually show, not something I'm obligated to refute on your behalf.
BobbyJo 4mo ago
The overwhelming majority of math tests involve doing math, so I'm not sure your critique is useful in this context.
- Maxatar 4mo ago
  Given that I'm not responding to any claim about the efficacy of math tests... it's actually your statement which is wholly irrelevant to this discussion.
  - BobbyJo 4mo ago
    "You can't compare academic tests and flight tests because flight tests involve flying" "Academic tests involve academics" "I'm not talking about academics!" That about sum it up?
    - Maxatar 4mo ago
      The submission isn't about academic tests involving academics... it's about the relevance of using such academic tests for the purpose of job screening.
      - lotsofpulp 4mo ago
        A business that wastes money on ineffective screening methods for employees will lose to a business hiring better employees.
        Maxatar 4mo ago
        Which is why almost no employers ask for SAT scores as a way of screening candidates, and why this article was written to showcase the specific reasons doing so is ineffective. Of course you'd have refrained from making such a vacuous reply if you bothered to read the article.
jimbokun 4mo ago
Is there a reason you left out the SAT and ACT? Because both have been shown to have predictive power for success in college.
- Maxatar 4mo ago
  Because I'm not trying to make a universal claim about all tests.
- halostatue 4mo ago
  For one semester. Maybe two.
fn-mote 4mo ago
The problem that colleges and the SWE profession in general face are identifying “bullshitters”. We need a filter and a fact based exam seems like a good place to start.

by Maxatar 4mo ago

WalterBright 4mo ago

They are never going to let you into a cockpit until you pass ground school, which involves a lot of math. > A teacher can be brilliant in the classroom yet stumble on a standardized certification exam full of pedagogical jargon. A teacher that cannot explain how calculus works cannot teach it to anybody. > a coding interview that relies on whiteboarding algorithms from memory can easily fail an excellent engineer who builds great software every day but doesn't recall the optimal solution to some puzzle on the spot. I've seen too many coders using bubble sort because they don't know enough to look for a better algorithm. In any case, the purpose of leet coding tests is to quickly filter out the utter frauds. I have a programmer friend who wanted a job at a major software corp. He knew he'd have to pass the leetcode in an early stage of the interviewing. He figured it would take 6 weeks or so to study that material. I suggested that, since he was applying for a $250K job, that would be the most productive studying he'd ever done. He agreed, did the 6 weeks of studying, aced the leetcode test, and got the $250K. So ya, there is a point to those tests, in filtering out the frauds and the ones who aren't willing to do what it takes to get those jobs.

Maxatar 4mo ago
This has to be a joke... Ground school most certainly does not involve a lot of math, it's not like there's any calculus or algebra involved... it's basic arithmetic. Furthermore it's categorically false that you need to pass ground school before you're allowed to fly. Are you just making things up? >A teacher that cannot explain how calculus works cannot teach it to anybody. This is a strawman argument, I never made anything that could even remotely be interpreted as this. >I've seen too many coders using bubble sort because they don't know enough to look for a better algorithm. This is committing a very basic logical fallacy. The fact that someone who is incompetent likely can't pass a test is not the same claim as someone who can't pass a test is likely incompetent. Hopefully you are able to identify this logical mistake that you're committing and revise your position accordingly.
- WalterBright 4mo ago
  > categorically false Google sez: "The U.S. Air Force strictly requires you to complete and pass formal academic ground training before you ever touch the controls of an aircraft" They're not going to risk an aircraft on an incompetent student. > A teacher can be brilliant in the classroom yet stumble on a standardized certification exam full of pedagogical jargon I stand by my statement. > logical fallacy A implies B meaning B implies A is indeed a logical fallacy. But that does not rule out B implies A. A and B can be strongly related to each other.
  - Maxatar 4mo ago
    So you are making things up... thanks for confirming that. While I appreciate that you reviewed what Google "sez"... you have misunderstood the relevant context which is that the U.S. Air Force also requires that you complete Initial Flight Training (IFT) before you start the Air Force's own formal training program (UPT). In IFT you will not be required to pass ground school before you get to fly. Furthermore, even if the Air Force did not require IFT before UPT (the Air Force's own training program), you've completely changed the nature of your argument. I have no dispute about whether the Air Force may or may not have stricter requirements for their pilots, but that wasn't your argument. >I stand by my statement. You've proudly planted your flag on a point nobody was contesting, which is a strange hill to celebrate on but you do you. >But that does not rule out B implies A. A and B can be strongly related to each other. Discussing a topic with someone who not only uses logically fallacies as justification for their argument but brazenly doubles down on said fallacy is a good sign that this is probably not a good discussion to continue spending time on. Like am I supposed to simply accept your logical fallacy and take on the burden of disproving every claim you can dream up simply because you've asserted it isn't logically impossible? The person making the claim carries the burden of supporting it, and "they're strongly related" is something you have to actually show, not something I'm obligated to refute on your behalf.

BobbyJo 4mo ago

The overwhelming majority of math tests involve doing math, so I'm not sure your critique is useful in this context.

Maxatar 4mo ago
Given that I'm not responding to any claim about the efficacy of math tests... it's actually your statement which is wholly irrelevant to this discussion.
- BobbyJo 4mo ago
  "You can't compare academic tests and flight tests because flight tests involve flying" "Academic tests involve academics" "I'm not talking about academics!" That about sum it up?
  - Maxatar 4mo ago
    The submission isn't about academic tests involving academics... it's about the relevance of using such academic tests for the purpose of job screening.
    - lotsofpulp 4mo ago
      A business that wastes money on ineffective screening methods for employees will lose to a business hiring better employees.
      - Maxatar 4mo ago
        Which is why almost no employers ask for SAT scores as a way of screening candidates, and why this article was written to showcase the specific reasons doing so is ineffective. Of course you'd have refrained from making such a vacuous reply if you bothered to read the article.

jimbokun 4mo ago

Is there a reason you left out the SAT and ACT? Because both have been shown to have predictive power for success in college.

Maxatar 4mo ago
Because I'm not trying to make a universal claim about all tests.
halostatue 4mo ago
For one semester. Maybe two.

fn-mote 4mo ago

The problem that colleges and the SWE profession in general face are identifying “bullshitters”. We need a filter and a fact based exam seems like a good place to start.