Comment by ALittleLight | Hacker News Reader

Comment by ALittleLight | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

That doesn't seem like a fair restriction to put on an interviewer to me. I'm just supposed to assume the candidate knows how to write code rather than ask them to demonstrate?

I imagine if I was hiring someone to play in a band or sing in a choir it would probably be a good idea to ask them to play or sing a bit before extending an offer. If I was hiring someone to work at plumbing company, I'd probably ask them a "How would you fix..." type question or two.

Saying that these questions are forbidden just because you are sometimes tired of doing them strikes me as unreasonable. While, of course, you get to decide what signals would make a company a bad fit for you - e.g. if I asked you my question you might think my company would be a bad fit for you, the interviewer decides which answers are a bad fit for the company. I would definitely take an answer like this as indicating a bad fit for the company.

This line from your comment is interesting to me though: "I've seen people actively be wrong in what they're looking for, as in technically wrong and therefore I failed". I frequently ask questions where I expect the candidate to want to clarifications or challenge what I'm saying. That's part of my job, and I'm trying to test for it the best way I know how. If you're happy with your job interviewing performance, then more power to you, but if you aren't - you may consider changing how you think about instances where the interviewer is wrong. Perhaps they are presenting opportunities for you to engage with them in a productive way, and even if they aren't doing so intentionally, maybe they are doing so unintentionally.

> Saying that these questions are forbidden just because you are sometimes tired of doing them strikes me as unreasonable.

You know what's unreasonable? Interviewing a bricklayer and asking them to describe how they lay bricks over the phone. And this is why your comparison to singing is hugely flawed. The phone is literally designed for carrying and hearing voices, not for more complex things.

You act as if it's literally impossible to figure out if someone can code unless you're trying to do it over the phone.

> This line from your comment is interesting to me though: "I've seen people actively be wrong in what they're looking for, as in technically wrong and therefore I failed". I frequently ask questions where I expect the candidate to want to clarifications or challenge what I'm saying.

I once had someone ask me what _type_ was returned from a controller in asp.net MVC, and when I gave the technically correct response this person told me I was wrong, a view is returned, then immediately ended the call. The number of times I've seen stuff like this happen is way too high.

But more than that, I want to address the attitude in that last point. This is a _HUGE_ problem with interviewers. They often come to conclusions they ought not come to based upon the circumstances. And the defenseless interviewee's are left trying to suss out hidden requirements like "expects them to ask clarifying questions". Interviewee's come in and have to try and navigate these byzantine, hidden requirements. And the question is, why do interviewers have hidden requirements like this? Because they know if they're _HONEST_ and communicate what they're looking for, the candidate will give it to them. That by itself should be a wake up call that interview's are hostile and un-real.

I'm just in a position in my career that I have the leverage to refuse to play those games. If you do something like that, you fundamentally have no clue how to actually hire people, and I refuse to bring any value to you or your company.

Honestly, have neither of you heard of coderpad? My screens are like the GGP's question, except both I am the candidate are on the phone and on coderpad. Coderpad even had voice and video calls now. The candidate is free to Google, to use the repl, to use any language, etc. If the candidates wants, they can just share their screen in their own environment.

But asking a candidate for 30-50 lines of code is completely normal.

Yeah, we use a tool like this. I agree it would be crazy to ask someone to code by voice over the phone, I assumed it was given that we were using a tool that let them write and share code.

You act as if it's on the person interviewing to set something like that up...

No they're not, you're both talking past each other. You're talking about phone-only interviews, but I don't think ALittleLight is even seeing it because that's such an obviously stupid idea it couldn't possibly be what you're talking about, so they think you're complaining about having to code.

I've literally had people ask me these types of questions while on the phone. And I "fail" on purpose because I won't attempt them. That's the point.

The fact that the internet exists and the interviewer could have used an online utility doesn't change my responsibility in that equation, that's just nuts.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com