Ask HN: Why do you do this during tech interviews?

There is a very simple answer to this, they don't know how to interview well.

Don't blame them too much though, the entire industry has this problem. It's one of the biggest open problems in our industry.

> I probably sound arrogant, but I'm not. I'm smart enough to decode this shitty aspect of human nature for what it is.

Your post does sound a bit arrogant and that's OK. A bit of arrogance is so common it shouldn't discount validity of your post per se.

I think getting an answer to your original "Why?" question may be difficult because: 1) I don't think many tech interviewers do what you experienced at these two examples 2) To the extent such practices happen and as smart as you may be, I don't think your "decoding" of things is broadly accurate.

I say this because "they tell the owner I'm junior to them, which is 100% untrue" is a ridiculous statement. First, it's odd to see the word "owner" when talking about startups which usually have "founders", so what kind of startups were these 2 places? Also how do you know what they said? And how do you know it's "100% untrue" that you are junior to them, as in how many questions did you get to ask about their tech skills and what does "junior" mean to you?

In terms of an answer: Your post shows a lot of assumptions that miss the point of technical interviews and what they look for. Things like "stupid ass tech trivia" have to be asked. Granted, sometimes too many basics do get asked. There is difference between "junior" from a technical skills perspective and "junior" on an org chart. Unless someone is hiring to fill the position above them on the org chart (it happens) then you are likely "junior" to the person hiring you. However, from a technical skills perspective, or what some interviewer may or may not have told their boss about you being junior...who cares what they said, you got the offer no? and once you start working there the people with superior skills will be able to stand out, 100% regardless of what was said months ago after an interview. So I would suggest: stop assuming incorrectly, think like a manager, read up about emotional quotient (EQ) in hiring, accept that life isn't "fair" and neither is interviewing. Best of luck sir or madame.

1. "Potential equity upside" is an illusion. It's better than a lottery ticket, sure, but the vast majority of startups fail, or fail to get big enough for the equity to be worth much. So might want to reconsider that goal. If you want guaranteed money, Google pay + bonus + equity probably has higher expected value. Or a hedge fund.

2. Personally I want to optimize for working with interesting people I can learn from, working on worthwhile problems. Last round of interviews with startups I met a whole bunch of people who I liked, at multiple companies.

3. I don't know why your experience is so different. Geography? I'm in Boston. The companies you're choosing to interview at? E.g. I tried hard to filter out companies with bad reviews on Glassdoor.

My process is written up in blog post, though it doesn't work as well for smaller startups. Nothing super novel, just an attempt to be more efficient at filtering: https://codewithoutrules.com/2016/10/14/job-you-dont-hate/

The answer is simple: the person who is interviewing you hasn't got as much experience as you do. He doesn't know through what hoops and hops you've gone through to get there. Therefore, he is testing you in a framework that he perceives to be right. In all fairness, for 99% of the candidates, that is the right approach.

I fit more or less the description of your profile (except I have GH projects with 5000+ stars and ~3K side passive side business; oh well, I'd prefer your balance, haha). I find it extremely hard to find the right position to work in. I am a consultant and I move from one position to another every 6-8 months. However, I have been most lucky in my last two positions.

There is something bonding about being recognized from the open source work. In that respect, the last interview I had felt more like a coffee break, discussing various project promoting strategies with the CTO. And yet, I had to go through interviews with another 3 developers (all happened in a time span of two hours, on the same day). But, thats their hiring policy. Just get done with it and enjoy the ride.

What's worse is Codility/HackerRank tests which expect you to come up with a dynamic programming based O(N) algorithm in order to prove your technical skills. This is just becoming ridiculous - I now ask in advance whether any of these pointless tests will be involved and I refuse to do them. I have a github and happy to do take home exercises.

The well known interviewer chest thumping / pissing contest aside, I don't know you but going solely on what you told us you don't sound as smart as you claim to be if you interview at startups for a job although you are actually interested in the potential for equity.

Think about it as a problem solver, if you are as technically confident as you claim, already know how to launch and run a business and don't need the job is interviewing for them the most efficient solution to solve the potential equity problem? Why are you not scouting for potential founders that you can team up with?

OTOH, all the bravado aside if you do really need a job to keep things going comfortably, you have to let such incidents go and move on. Interviewers such as those you describe don't make for good colleagues anyways.

> I get the job offer, but they tell the owner I'm junior to them, which is 100% untrue.

If you're interviewing for a position, surely the people conducting the interview will be the people who will be managing the successful candidate?

"Surely"?

That is almost universally untrue. It's especially untrue for senior people interviewing at early startups as they are frequently staffed with only junior staff.

The cynical answer is they absolutely do not care about famous open source project or that successful side project. They did not pour thousands of hours and sweat building them so how would they even truly recognize how challenging they were to achieve? (if you think thats unfair then just stay self employed and never bother to interview again anywhere)

the less cynical answer is that they are used to people overinflating their achievements only to fail at the job. thus they dont care what you did - just that you answer their technical questions correctly

2 is not a great sample size.