|
sent a bunch of resumes yesterday, it seems like I already got an interview tomorrow 
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2018 15:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 22:42 |
|
|
akadajet posted:you give me all the money, and i do whatever i want. but where do you see yourself in five years?
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2018 16:45
|
|
|
Someone mentioned a while ago about being paid 400k cash. I think that would qualify as a dream job for me.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2018 16:46
|
|
|
qhat posted:Someone mentioned a while ago about being paid 400k cash. I think that would qualify as a dream job for me. I can’t even dream anymore my mind went straight to “how do I explain to the bank they just gave me cash?”
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2018 16:48
|
|
|
qhat posted:If you can't find the right person for the job, you're not paying enough. Plain and simple. it's not quite that simple. that would definitely be true if you find your offers are rejected. but it's not necessarily the case that you get as far as extending offers. the main problem is that 99% of candidates are complete, utter poo poo. people who could never be employable in any field. it's very expensive to wade through a poo poo-covered haystack searching for a needle that may or may not be present. so people apply various heuristics to filter the candidates. even a very, very fine filter may have false positives. and when good candidates are a terrible rarity, even one false positive could make a position impossible to fill it is, in short, an adverse selection problem -- so why are the candidates always terrible? the worst, un-hireable candidates are on the market the longest, and they apply to the most jobs. a good candidate might take ten interviews ever, in his or her entire career. a bad candidate might take over a hundred interviews in a single job search. it's not that 99% of people are awful -- it's that the people who happen to be applying to your open position are more likely to be awful than the general population
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2018 17:02
|
|
|
qhat posted:Someone mentioned a while ago about being paid 400k cash. I think that would qualify as a dream job for me. work for a bank or hedge fund or whatever stock compensation isn't really A Thing in finance. heaping piles of money is the norm. often hedge funds will allow you to invest some of your money in the fund. that's the perk.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2018 17:03
|
|
|
don't you need a really big name on your resume to even be considered for those jobs? whether it be a school or employer
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2018 17:05
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:so why are the candidates always terrible? the fact that someone uploaded their resume to your companys jobs.careers page and clicked through all the nonsense already means theyre not tier-one material also, bad candidates are on the market more often than good candidates (because theyre not very good workers and they get fired/laid off/encourage to find another gig more often) which means that the pool of active job seekers that a hiring company is drawing from is heavily tilted towards clunkers and mediocrities of course, all this applies in the reverse too. really good companies dont have lots of open reqs and turnover. the counterpoint to "if youre such a good worker, why are you unemployed/unhappy with your current job" is "if your company is such a great place to work, why is this position even open for applications"
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2018 17:44
|
|
|
so what I’m hearing is there’s a finite number of good jobs and good candidates
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2018 17:50
|
|
|
Pollyanna posted:so what I’m hearing is there’s a finite number of good jobs and good candidates no you read this completely wrong
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2018 18:06
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:don't you need a really big name on your resume to even be considered for those jobs? whether it be a school or employer to be a financier, yes to be a technology dude working at a finance firm? no, not at all.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2018 18:06
|
|
|
all those words are making me feel even more unemployable now
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2018 18:09
|
|
|
Shaman Linavi posted:all those words are making me feel even more unemployable now they shouldn't. if anything, it should make you feel better about yourself. you are almost certainly better than 99% of the candidates, and it's a matter of dumb luck whether you make it through the poorly designed filters.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2018 18:10
|
|
|
FMguru posted:the fact that someone uploaded their resume to your companys jobs.careers page and clicked through all the nonsense already means theyre not tier-one material this was true for spolsky because spolsky ran a very small software company that made an unsexy product (a ticket system) using the worst technology known to man (proprietary BASIC dialect) i work for a large company with sexy projects and cool technologies. people want to work here small business is doubling down on adverse selection: you get the normal selection of crap candidates, compounded by how stupid a candidate has to be to want to work in a place that cannot significantly advance his or her career
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2018 18:11
|
|
|
also at large companies even internal referrals have to go through that system and at google the internal people doing the referring don't even get a say in the process. or the status
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2018 18:12
|
|
|
i am trying a different approach this time. i am starting by shotgunning my resume out to jobs that seem merely ok. then once i have refined my resume and interviewing skills again i will start specifically targeting jobs i really want. (i am very bad at resume writing and interviewing)
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2018 18:15
|
|
|
in more job hunting being garbage news, friday i got an email from Indeed Prime saying "hey sign up for us this is cool!!" whatever and so i did. afterwards they sent me an e-mail saying everything looks good and hey here is a link to HackerRank to take a short programming thing to make your profile better, just do it next week some time! yesterday i got an email telling me they don't think Indeed Prime is right for me? yeah, i guess some of these filters even contradict themselves or something still going to take their online coding thing because it never hurts to practice whiteboarding
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2018 18:16
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:it's not quite that simple. that would definitely be true if you find your offers are rejected. but it's not necessarily the case that you get as far as extending offers. I agree. I got a free trial of linked in premium recently and had a gander at the premium group forum. It really put things massively into perspective for me. People asking why they got rejected at a tech screening after submitting a huge C# project when the problem required no more than a single line of bash, followed by masses of people parroting that the question was unfair lol. Doing interviews for this company has also opened my eyes again at how terrible most candidates are. Like for gently caress sake how are you in programming and do not know what inheritance is bad. Makes me wonder how it took me a while to get a job in this town, but then I remembered it's because I don't have the connections here yet to just hit people up on LinkedIn.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2018 18:49
|
|
|
the company i interviewed with called me like an hour after i left and told me i'd be getting an offer soon. i guess i was the least worst rube. a little lowball on the salary but the commute is good and the job doesnt sound stressful at all.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2018 18:50
|
|
|
FMguru posted:of course, all this applies in the reverse too. really good companies dont have lots of open reqs and turnover. the counterpoint to "if youre such a good worker, why are you unemployed/unhappy with your current job" is "if your company is such a great place to work, why is this position even open for applications" I don't know that this is necessarily true, depending what you consider 'lots of turnover'. People come and join and leave companies all the time for reasons that may not be related, based on what they are looking for right now in their personal lives, and the lives of their families also impact things. If you have a really solid company with absolutely competent top-level staff, you have to expect not to have enough high-ranking positions for all the junior employees you are also great at training right now that some of them will be poached and will leave, just because there's an upper bound to higher-level positions you can have. Like what would you do with 150 tech leads and level whatever senior devs and 4 juniors? Is this a possible thing? Probably not. Turnover rates that are too low can in fact be a sign of an unhealthy work environment as much as high turnover rates. Very low turnover rates are at times associated with a business that cannot get rid of its bad/under-performing/unambitious/toxic (depending on the source) employees, weak managers who can't get the guts to fire anyone even if they should, or it could mean anything like permanent under-staffing in a geographically isolated area (nobody can leave, nobody's getting in either). If you are growing and are hiring N people a year and are not even losing a few of them because they are not fitting in, they're misbehaving, or not progressing and adapting the way you thought they would, you either have the secret hiring sauce with amazing on-boarding and constant training without any skill ceiling, or, more likely, something is not working great. Like 20% turnover is probably high as hell, but then 5% may be rather worryingly low if you're not in a highly specialized area with low competition.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2018 18:51
|
|
|
theodop posted:welp, tomorrow is my last day at this company after 12 years. Ur gonna miss it...
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2018 23:31
|
|
|
besides, u already accepted the bargain 
Gazpacho fucked around with this message at 04:09 on Mar 20, 2018 |
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2018 04:06
|
|
|
HoboMan posted:what's a good bs answer for "what does your dream job look like?", all my dreams are long dead This translates to, "please reiterate the least poo poo parts of this job's description, in your own words, and in a tone that indicates interest."
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2018 05:35
|
|
|
Gazpacho posted:besides, u already accepted the bargain https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpE_xMRiCLE
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2018 05:36
|
|
|
im interviewing at 2 places just now done a tech test for 1 place, waiting to hear back from it have a tech test to do for the other place, a hackerrank exercise im hoping i can get with at least 1 of them, as they are the most attractive places to work here
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2018 15:43
|
|
|
about 2 years ago my team was developing a web app for a side project to migrate our tech to the service model. there was one UI dev working on it and she wrote a lot of code based on open sores Ajax MVC frameworks that aren't react or angular or spring. we were in the process of hiring another UI dev to support her but then one day she didn't like the way she was treated with regard to time off and she quit without notice. we had a candidate in the pipeline and he wasn't outstanding but he could spell CSS and write the HTML for a checkbox, and we had no one else to maintain the app, so we hired him. also at that point the project's funding was cut (so we only get one dev) and we started "borrowing" the site for purposes other than the original project, basically anything that required an internal web app was grafted onto it. the new guy's english was poor and whenever he didn't understand what was going on with the framework, rather than study the docs he'd just comment the code that used the framework and hack something without it. nobody was reviewing his code in any detail. first because he was the only UI dev, second because he didn't really understand how to submit a review. he'd just hack on his dev machine all release and then crap out a huge diff with random whitespace changes and commented code blocks and whatever the gently caress. when we told him to submit code more regularly he ignored it. come last october, as i've mentioned a few times, the company axed most of the team including him. that meant that i, without much UI experience to speak of, had to assume responsibility for the code. since that day my life has never known peace. last month i found plaintext passwords manifesting in the app, physically. morals: 1. don't hire a weak candidate just because you're in a tight spot 2. enforce the code review process, without exception Gazpacho fucked around with this message at 18:57 on Mar 20, 2018 |
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2018 18:54
|
|
|
why do you always end up working in awful situations
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2018 19:02
|
|
|
Gazpacho posted:about 2 years ago my team was developing a web app for a side project to migrate our tech to the service model. there was one UI dev working on it and she wrote a lot of code based on open sores Ajax MVC frameworks that aren't react or angular or spring. lmao great cautionary tale
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2018 19:13
|
|
|
FamDav posted:why do you always end up working in awful situations
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2018 19:16
|
|
|
Gazpacho posted:because i cling to idealistic notion of team loyalty only trust your fists
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2018 19:20
|
|
|
Gazpacho posted:because i cling to idealistic notion of team loyalty gently caress that. Run away screaming.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2018 19:53
|
|
|
PokeJoe posted:only trust your fists
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2018 20:41
|
|
|
ive been doing exercises on those code practice sites lately in my spare time and got a couple interview challenges from there. how legit are these? dont want to waste time doing their screening challenges if this kinda spam is common
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2018 22:07
|
|
|
Dongslayer. posted:ive been doing exercises on those code practice sites lately in my spare time and got a couple interview challenges from there. how legit are these? dont want to waste time doing their screening challenges if this kinda spam is common I did an interview with Microsoft a year ago, they gave me the exact same problem that I solved right before I went to bed the previous night. Needless to say, I still didn't get the job as there was someone else whose skills better fit the role, according to the recruiter.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2018 22:15
|
|
|
FamDav posted:why do you always end up working in awful situations slightly related, my last interview at google was for a test engineer position (though I didn't know that going in because they use an obfuscatory name for it now) and the test engineers who interviewed me just couldn't believe that there are companies in the world that don't have any test engineers on staff, because they've never worked at one. no poo poo? Gazpacho fucked around with this message at 00:51 on Mar 21, 2018 |
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2018 00:31
|
|
|
qhat posted:I did an interview with Microsoft a year ago, they gave me the exact same problem that I solved right before I went to bed the previous night. Needless to say, I still didn't get the job as there was someone else whose skills better fit the role, according to the recruiter. You failed a phone screen on a problem that you had already solved?
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2018 01:14
|
|
|
Fiedler posted:You failed a phone screen on a problem that you had already solved? or they picked someone else based on a resume bullet point and the phone screen was moot
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2018 01:34
|
|
|
cis autodrag posted:Ur gonna miss it... Honestly, I had a thing I was doing on the side to bring lambdas and LINQ-style collections with functional methods and I actually enjoyed the challenge of doing this poo poo in the awful Cache environment and I might try and re-do it and open source it... gently caress its already happening
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2018 02:03
|
|
|
Fiedler posted:You failed a phone screen on a problem that you had already solved? It was on site, and the recruiter told me after the fact specifically that it was between me and someone else but that they couldn't offer more than one position.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2018 02:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 22:42 |
|
|
theodop posted:Honestly, I had a thing I was doing on the side to bring lambdas and LINQ-style collections with functional methods and I actually enjoyed the challenge of doing this poo poo in the awful Cache environment and I might try and re-do it and open source it... I take it you guys used ObjectScript rather than strict ansi m? Or were you passing around stringified functions and x-ing them without regard for type safety?
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2018 03:14
|
|