Hacker News Reader

Comment by livestyle | Hacker News Reader

Very similar approach as this article by Tucker Max.

http://tuckermax.me/dont-look-for-talent-find-people-who-do-...

Don't usually turn to this guy for advice but I 100% agree with this. I am going through the same old interview template right now that everyone has copied from google/facebook and I think while it applies some places, for early startups, its ridiculous to use that as a marker.

You should hire for a developers ability to execute, not their ability to solve problem about bowling balls and skyscrapers, and not their ability to reverse() a string without using reverse(). I get that they are testing your overall data structure knowledge and your algorithmic thinking, but those are also things that one can find on google, things that one can educate one's self on when they need to. Early stage companies want to look for those people who will do that, people who encounter a problem and then just go out and solve it.

(.....now I will stop ranting and go back to memorizing stupid puzzle/data structure interview questions, for my next phone screen in a few hours)

I really like asking questions about what a person has done (especially as personal / home projects), also to a lesser degree what tech blogs they frequent (if they only mention aggregators, thats half a demerit).

What are the weaknesses of these questions?

The problem with rating a candidate on the basis of his personal/home projects is that it excludes potentially-excellent candidates who are __unable__ to work on anything at home due to, e.g., having several young children and half-dead parents to care for.

(Also, don't try to retort with "so ask them about the personal/home projects they did before having kids", as that wouldn't be sufficient to cover the people who have had children at a young age; e.g., before turning 20 years-old.)

Or how about those potentially-excellent candidates who don't have children but just have a life? I love my job. I love writing code. I am passionate about it. The time I spend at work I mostly enjoy, but 40 hours a week is enough for me. I would rather spend the rest of my time with the people I love or on other ventures that don't involve sitting in front of a screen. If you don't want to hire me because my job isn't my entire life, than I don't want to work for you. Nobody should be penalized career-wise for enjoying their free time.

Never seen that. All people I know who love programming even find time to do their own stuff on a 60 hour schedule.

I love programming, but I love my hobbies (e.g., film and video preservation) A LOT more.

I don't love programming enough to devote time outside of my 40 hours/week to it.

And just to avoid misunderstandings: I don't think that 60 hour schedules are good! Personally, I prefer a 25 hour week of coding only on my own stuff and 0 hours of coding for other people :-)

>if they only mention aggregators, thats half a demerit

This is silly. Aggregators let the quality articles rise to the top. It's a much more efficient use of your time (assuming you don't become addicted). These are exactly the type of totally arbitrary, no signal producing filters that people need to get away from.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com