|
kitten emergency posted:idk if anyone else brought this up but an interesting data point for you - the place I’ve been at for a while (sf-based startup, got bought about two years ago) was founded by xooglers and a lot of their engineers didn’t like the ctci algo lottery style interviews from experience, so they switched to something that was pretty different; no live coding, just a bunch of “go through this function and tell me what it does”, “let’s diagram a system”, “explain something you’ve worked on in the past and let’s unpack it in the interview”, etc while I like the idea behind “explain something you’ve worked on in the past” if they want a deep dive I’d probably waste way too much time trying to remember what is public and what isn’t I’ve not minded the “what does this code do” interviews I’ve had in the past but I’ve only encountered those so far with embedded positions so they’re more C pointer syntax/implications tests. I could see it being problematic if you use code examples turn it into a framework/standard library quiz. hobbesmaster fucked around with this message at 16:40 on Feb 20, 2023 |
#
?
Feb 20, 2023 16:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 07:13 |
|
|
Mantle posted:Wtf? I would love that type of interview. It would be a great way to figure out what it's like to work with the interviews. strong agree, i cannot wrap my head around anyone hating that style of interview. i'm really curious about what this common "bombing out" looked like.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2023 16:43
|
|
|
raminasi posted:strong agree, i cannot wrap my head around anyone hating that style of interview. i'm really curious about what this common "bombing out" looked like. I imagine the job where kitten emergency works gets a lot of people fresh out of college who expect a Cracking the Coding Interview style of interview, or beep boop robot silicon valley types who have sacrificed social skills for their abilities to memorize algorithms.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2023 16:46
|
|
|
raminasi posted:strong agree, i cannot wrap my head around anyone hating that style of interview. i'm really curious about what this common "bombing out" looked like. it’s been a couple years since we switched but the biggest thing was people who were good on paper but couldn’t talk through the system/past project stuff (because they were worried about public vs nonpublic stuff for example), or actually withdrew themselves because they didn’t think we were “rigorous” enough edit: mostly sv brained people - we were hiring pretty senior people then
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2023 16:46
|
|
|
AnimeIsTrash posted:beep boop robot silicon valley types who have sacrificed social skills for their abilities to memorize algorithms. And do you really want to work with these people?
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2023 16:47
|
|
|
i mean, yes, empirically, seems like?
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2023 16:51
|
|
|
kitten emergency posted:candidates hated it, broadly. what the gently caress
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2023 16:53
|
|
|
ultrafilter posted:And do you really want to work with these people? its not a matter of if i want to work with them or not its a matter of how im going to destroy them dr manhattan style if they keep on writing dogshit defects against our product because they dont like the UI
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2023 16:57
|
|
|
the "talk through it" interviews work really well for me because i can do that and i'm a cis guy with light skin and control over what type of accent i use. interviews that lean more into conversational styles are basically alley-oops most of the time unless it's actually a place that i wouldn't want to work. this is especially true if there's no formal rubric structuring the evaluation of the conversation. in my experience, the people who think conversational style interviews are better very rarely have rubrics implemented. as someone who cares about minimizing the effects of bias in hiring, i don't like giving those kind of interviews though. unless it's explicitly as a shitbird filter, then it's ok i guess
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2023 18:37
|
|
|
a good shitbird filter is important. typically, we throw in a data structure question and then do followup questions until they get stuck, mostly to see how they handle not knowing something. its okay if they get flustered with a question they don’t know, good if they seem eager to learn something they didn’t before, and bad if they get defensive and tell you what school they graduated from
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2023 19:32
|
|
|
Achmed Jones posted:control over what type of accent i use Talking through how I "theenk" so the other Californians in the room implicitly trust me
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2023 20:15
|
|
|
somehow i've put myself into an interview process with five technicals and then a panel at the end thunderdome feels really unappealing right now
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2023 20:45
|
|
|
dioxazine posted:five technicals and then a panel at the end gross. Like back to back?
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2023 20:49
|
|
|
thankfully not, but it will probably take two weeks
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2023 21:25
|
|
|
dioxazine posted:somehow i've put myself into an interview process with five technicals and then a panel at the end what do they expect to learn from the fifth technical not uncovered from the four previous?
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2023 22:39
|
|
|
maybe they have a distinct separation of duties and each person only does one thing and they combine into voltron at the end to become a full stack CTO? i'm not too worried, i'll probably flame out by the third
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2023 23:03
|
|
|
champagne posting posted:what do they expect to learn from the fifth technical not uncovered from the four previous? that’s normal FAANG interviewing, it’s 5 different people talking to you
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2023 23:04
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:that’s normal FAANG interviewing, it’s 5 different people talking to you i remember goog being 3 but its been a while
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2023 00:38
|
|
|
goog has been five for a while, unless you're converting to full-time from an internship. it's not supposed to be five technical algo-lottery interviews though
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2023 00:54
|
|
|
in my org it's 2 coding, 2 domain knowledge (presumably architecture/design for SWEs), and 1 googleyness/leadership
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2023 01:58
|
|
|
With the recent layoffs, and hiring freezes I keep on hearing about, is it worth applying for tech jobs now? Or should I wait a couple of months?
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2023 18:39
|
|
|
how does holding off help things?
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2023 18:49
|
|
|
I don't actually know. My thinking was with the recent FAANG layoffs a lot of people would be applying, and with the hiring freezes in place there would only be a fewer slots open than usually and that waiting a few months would help out with both.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2023 19:12
|
|
|
Might as well keep an eye open and apply to anything looks appealing. Maybe your odds aren't great but they're better than the zero you get from not applying.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2023 19:33
|
|
|
I haven't been applying non-stop to places, but I still haven't been able to land an interview -- I did have a phone screen with Google, but it was the week before their layoffs and then my recruiter got impacted/assigned to a different team lol. a month later they reconnected and were like "cool you passed but we don't have any teams open for you right now so we're dropping the application" 
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2023 00:33
|
|
|
Apparently this is a volume game. It's been so long since I've had to do this that I'm not sure what is normal. I'd say to start applying now because I've sent a ton of stuff out and it's completely crickets. I had one initial phone chat via a friend but everything I thought could be fun about the role wasn't actually part of the role, so I withdrew.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2023 02:30
|
|
|
havelock posted:Apparently this is a volume game. It's been so long since I've had to do this that I'm not sure what is normal. I'd say to start applying now because I've sent a ton of stuff out and it's completely crickets. I didn't mean to imply that I had stopped applying. I have pretty much been applying for spots nonstop since the year started. The only in person interview I have landed was at adobe, but found out weeks later after trying to follow up and not getting responses that I was rejected.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2023 16:28
|
|
|
how long do folks wait before no-showing a candidate? i was talking to our hr person while waiting today, and she said she never waits more than 2-3 minutes, while i was worried that my 5-8 minutes might be too short.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2023 21:05
|
|
|
nudgenudgetilt posted:how long do folks wait before no-showing a candidate? your hr is a psychopath and has caused you to miss out on qualified candidates
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2023 21:16
|
|
|
one minute for every misspelling in the job posting
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2023 21:17
|
|
|
i would probably give them 10
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2023 21:20
|
|
|
Truman Peyote posted:i would probably give them 10 although it depends on how hard the job is to fill - if the req has sat open for four months and this is the first qualified person weve been able to bring in, i might wait a little longer
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2023 21:22
|
|
|
PIZZA.BAT posted:your hr is a psychopath and has caused you to miss out on qualified candidates But we already knew that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2023 21:23
|
|
|
I usually zone out after about 5 minutes and leave the call open for another 5 minutes before calling it. If you had the nerve to join an interview 10+ minutes late I’d probably give you some points for it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2023 21:31
|
|
|
tk posted:I usually zone out after about 5 minutes and leave the call open for another 5 minutes before calling it. it was in this context that i recently learned of an apparent zoom bug where it will somehow put two people who are putatively in the same room in separate ones, so that they both think that the other no-showed
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2023 21:33
|
|
|
heh, usually we use zoom, but this was another goddamn calendly candidate that insisted on hangouts
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2023 21:44
|
|
|
nudgenudgetilt posted:how long do folks wait before no-showing a candidate? is it an online meeting? Then I'd give people way more because computers are awful. If you've reached your waiting limit why not give them a call? You have phones right?
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2023 21:47
|
|
|
champagne posting posted:is it an online meeting? Then I'd give people way more because computers are awful. lolwat a primary responsibility of the job is showing up to meetings on time via computer. this particular candidate went so far as to insist we use their scheduling software and their video conferencing software for the call instead of our own. i'm definitely not calling someone to see why they didn't show up when i could instead start looking at the resume for my next call. i'm not so cruel as to only give 2-3 minutes, but by 8 minutes you better have a pretty loving amusing story for me, and a total no-email/no-show is getting a generic rejection letter.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2023 22:15
|
|
|
on occasion i have had issues with zoom that require a reboot in worst cases, which can double combofuck you over since you are already probably sweating bullets debugging audio issues 1 minute before the interview on the other hand, you should always do a quick sound-video check before calls like that
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2023 22:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 07:13 |
|
|
4lokos basilisk posted:on occasion i have had issues with zoom that require a reboot in worst cases, which can double combofuck you over since you are already probably sweating bullets debugging audio issues 1 minute before the interview poo poo happens, but if you can't reboot your poo poo in 5 minutes in 2023.... and I'd hope you'd shoot an e-mail "I'm running a moment behind"
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2023 22:16
|
|