Hacker News Reader

Then don't call it minimum because it's a lie. All these secret code-language gatekeeping tricks in industry are awful. I'm happy to see one of the replies calls it sex discrimination. If that's what it takes to stop employers lying on job ads, good on them.

It would be great if job ads were actually honest and gave a real minimum, maximum, and typical qualifications.

They should really just list the responsibilities and let people apply. Minimums and/or requirements are often not correct per the word definitions, but maximum and typical qualifications are probably fraught with even more ambiguity.

Responsibilities is not a bad idea. Really anything that isn't as dishonest as it is now.

Another cool idea is to list what are the proficiencies of existing team members.

One of the minimum requirements that I have in a company is that their HR department understands the definition of the word minimum.

> I'm happy to see one of the replies calls it sex discrimination.

I'm not seeing this reply. In what sense is it discriminatory?

I believe this is the reply in question:

https://twitter.com/colinmbrandt/status/1409577979731058699

See for example: https://hbr.org/2014/08/why-women-dont-apply-for-jobs-unless...

> Carmack does not have a Master’s Degree, as listed in the minimum requirements. Other than that, he seems to greatly exceed every other requirement.

In other words: Industry legend ALMOST makes minimum requirements.

I know what you are saying, but it is absolutely crazy to me that they would post a job ad with Minimum Requirements even someone like Carmack doesn't have. Not to mention the "Preferred Requirements".

Maybe they should make their Minimum Requirements more realistic or stop calling them minimum if they are not actually minimum requirements.

To add insult to the injury: he will probably not pass the Facebook coding interview. I tried (for a different position) and failed, due to a bullshit reason. It was a coding interview with two problems, 1-hour time limit, and an interviewer who watches how you enter code into their online editor without the possibility to run anything.

The problems were not that hard, the real difficulty was due to the time limit.

During my previous experience as a software developer I have acquired a habit to write an obviously-correct but non-optimized solution to every problem, to use as something to compare a better solution to, i.e. as a test factory. So, I had only enough time to solve the first problem correctly, and to implement a wasteful solution to the second one. In retrospect, implementing the "obviously correct" but wasteful solution would not have helped, because I could not compare the results anyway.

In my opinion, the test selects for people who are lucky enough to discover and implement the non-obvious optimization correctly from the first attempt. Or, as I have discovered later, who have bought all books on programming interview preparation, because the problems were actually non-unique.

Yep. Leetcode style problems are effective filters only for people who grind leetcode. It's tailored for a very particular level of developer; someone who is smart enough to understand the problems and solutions (and retain them well enough to trot them out quickly), ambitious enough to put in that level of effort to work for a 'top tier' tech company, and sufficiently docile and willing to work on BS (outside of their working hours, typically, too) that they'll spend that kind of time just to try to make it into one.

So someone who went out and built a SaaS business themselves, was moderately successful, and sold it? Not going to pass. Someone who spent three months grinding leetcode and doing little else? Probably going to pass.

I'm guessing it's highly effective at selecting for the kind of candidates these companies want.

> I'm guessing it's highly effective at selecting for the kind of candidates these companies want.

Bingo!!!

> I'm guessing it's highly effective at selecting for the kind of candidates these companies want.

Why would a like a large company favors candidates that are willing to jump through hoops?

Perhaps they are selecting for docile, dutiful, eager to please?

That was part of the implication I was very intentionally making, yes.

> "I know what you are saying, but it is absolutely crazy to me that they would post a job ad with Minimum Requirements even someone like Carmack doesn't have."

Why? Carmack is an extreme outlier and it's likely that even among the people he knows that he would label as qualified for the position nearly all have at least a master's degree and the other requirements.

Where do you get the assumption from that Carmack knows people that fulfil these minimum requirements?

I would bet he doesn't or at least thinks the minimum requirements are overkill, otherwise why would he make a remark like he did?

The point is that when a legend like Carmack doesn't make the MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS maybe there is something wrong with the requirements.

> "Where do you get the assumption from that Carmack knows people that fulfil these minimum requirements?"

The top names in any given field tend to know each other (it's a pretty small group and they network) and most of them got their degrees and other qualifications the traditional way. As for why he made the remark, IMO it's a self-deprecating joke about his being an outlier.

> Everyone should know that the requirements in job listings are almost always guidelines, not a strict checklist.

I don't think the onus should be on the people who are applying.

There are a lot of people who are rule-followers, literal-minded, etc., and a lot of people with mental disabilities that might not be able to see through this checklist - of these candidates, a lot of them are likely fantastic SWEs. Why penalize people who are thoughtful about your posting? This just incentivizes lying both ways - it tells me that the company doesn't even believe their own requirements, so I may as well just apply anyway, even if it ends up completely wasting their time.

> Carmack does not have a Master’s Degree, as listed in the minimum requirements. Other than that, he seems to greatly exceed every other requirement.

Carmack doesn't have 8+ years of experience in Machine Learning, he's only been working on AI full time for about 3 years.

Carmack doesn't have substantial experience with "mobile graphics pipelines" or "graphics hardware and drivers on mobile platforms" - as Oculus, Quake and Doom were all PC-only.

Carmack isn't a "Proven cross-functional partner, working across functions to drive solutions" because those are nonsense words that mean nothing.

I agree with the others but not the middle one, at Oculus he worked exclusively on the mobile variants, the GearVR and in-house prototypes. His entire mission was dedicated to mobile graphics pipelines and graphics hardware & drivers.

> Everyone should know that the requirements in job listings are almost always guidelines

In my experience job requirements are used to weed out and reject those that the hiring people don't like for reasons other than ability.

This ranges from excluding women, being only inclusive of women, only hiring a certain races or religions, or justifying the use of work visas. I've even seen it used to justify not hiring someone because of their accent.

> Other than that, he seems to greatly exceed every other requirement.

Even this one?

"8+ years of experience in one or more of the following areas: machine learning, recommendation systems, pattern recognition, NLP, data mining, or artificial intelligence"