|
i'm going to start my first job search in 4 years. last time was as a junior a few years out of school, re-reading my old resume makes me cringe anyway a couple of resume q's: - if you worked with a small team on a big Thing X, is saying "implemented Thing X" or "helped implement Thing X" better? - should i leave my free time projects on or off? for instance i have a thing of medium complexity (chess AI) but i haven't worked on it in years. would interviewers care? e: should i just recommit it to github so it looks like i worked on it recently?
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2018 04:26
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 12, 2024 01:45 |
|
|
do people post their resumes here or is that a gray-forum-only thing? like i said i haven't done one of these things in 4-5 years and just wanna make sure nothing sounds weird
|
|
#
¿
Jul 21, 2018 18:46
|
|
|
alright here it is, pls don't dox me: https://www.dropbox.com/s/74w28tllu9mric6/Anonymized.pdf?dl=0 i'm trying to get into a more security engineering role but i guess i'll do webshit for the right amound of figgies basically looking for anything that sounds weird. also maybe i should list categories of technologies (e.g. relational databases, version control, "serverless" "architecture")?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 22, 2018 05:46
|
|
|
it's a thing, but not a good thing -- they probably want to change it by adding "keywords"
|
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2018 00:48
|
|
|
anyone try those practice interview sites? i booked a couple interviews at the free ones (triplebyte, interviewing.io, pramp) for next week
|
|
#
¿
Sep 5, 2018 19:56
|
|
|
so i tried some practice interview sites this week triplebyte-- basically glorified recruiters that do the tech screen for the companies they work with. except you only have to do one of them so it saves you some time. the interview is 2 hours separated into programming a game, short answers to a variety of questions, debugging a 500 line program, and systems design. feedback was meh: they just rate how you did on each portion and send you a non-personalized list of resources to study up on. you only get one interview, then they try to get you hired by setting up talks with companies. interviewing.io-- you get interviewed by other people (who don't work for but are paid by interviewing.io), there's a rating system to ensure you get decent quality ones. my interview was pretty free-form, he asked what i wanted to be tested on and i said everything but we just did algorithms for an hour. the platform is a collaborative editor so not as realistic as a whiteboard, but more realistic than triplebyte's "you get to use your IDE." feedback was pretty minimal but probably through no fault of the interviewer (i solved both problems straightforwardly). the nice thing is you can have additional practice interviews (3 max maybe?) and also later have anonymized real interviews directly with companies. a thing i would have liked to practice would have been behavioral questions but both interviews focused on technical ones. triplebyte seems more for actually finding a job, interviewing.io more for practicing technical questions. i guess overall they're worth it tho, you get to practice talking out loud to solve decent quality technical problems, they're both free, and i guess it could save me some time bullshitting cover letters since they match you up directly with companies after. Pie Colony fucked around with this message at 17:23 on Sep 14, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2018 17:21
|
|
|
meatpotato posted:i went to an on-site and wasn't asked to do any whiteboard coding it's probably a bad company, or hiring interns
|
|
#
¿
Sep 20, 2018 00:58
|
|
|
lotta terrible programmer takes on pair programming ittCiaphas posted:i'd simply run out of gas, it takes constant sustained effort for me to be sociable and i wish i was exaggerating this is called being introverted and almost every programmer is. it's not an interview, it's not a date, there's no pressure to be funny and charming in this situation. you should be comfortable talking to your peers about code, and if not, you should practice until you are Ploft-shell crab posted:pairing is so valuable for juniors or people new to the team though or when you want to know what your team is working on so you can help out (if they go on vacation, if you have spare cycles, etc). or when you want architectural review early in the process where the cost of changes is low. learning is not unique to junior programmers either, i routinely paired with other seniors with different strengths than mine to learn about systems programming, kubernetes, AWS, and a ton of other stuff.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 20, 2018 20:41
|
|
|
qhat posted:Everyone learns things differently, some simply just do not learn by watching other people type code or having someone else breathing down their neck. It's got nothing to do with introversion. Some non-"introverted" pairs also end up spending more time blabbering on and/or arguing rather than actually doing the work, and not because they are incompetent engineers. If pair programming works for your team then great, but don't force it on people and tell them to get used to it or whatever, because it just doesn't work well for some people/projects. i said exactly 0 of these things, but - the learning that comes from pair programming (which is only one of its benefits) doesn't come from watching the other person code, it comes from having a conversation with the other person about the code. there are no textbooks or coursera classes for your codebase - "breathing down your neck" is a really antagonistic way to frame collaborating with your teammates - are you complaining that some coworkers SOCIALIZE on the job? the absolute horror. also arguing is more often debating which is doing the work. - i'm not in a position to force anything on anyone. someone here was considering applying to a company that had an already established pairing policy, and was up front about it also two misc thoughts - i've paired on 3 different teams, albeit all in the backend webshit sphere, but on considerably different tasks (writing APIs, setting up deployment pipelines, migrating services into AWS) and it was almost always useful - when a company says they pair on 100% of things, they don't mean actually 100%. some things are trivial to do in a couple minutes, other times people aren't just available for pairing
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2018 01:23
|
|
|
meatpotato posted:
goongrats but also don't bank on anything until you actually have it in formal writing
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2018 01:24
|
|
jeeeeezus the no-whiteboard-coding place gave me an unofficial salary offer about 35% more than I made at my last job
|
PokeJoe posted:Counterpoint: a friend of mine quit a job because of their bad pair programming policy. Nothing could get merged to develop branch that was not paired. yea like a lot of processes (agile, issue tracking) it's possible to do poorly, but i think implemented well it's a net positive. i know that's a tautology, etc etc, but at the end of the day i'll fight for it
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2018 01:52
|
|
|
code reviews are different than pair programming. in pair programming, you get to see which ideas were considered but not used, you get to pick up useful workflows, you get feedback faster in the process. though code reviews are useful too. but ok, you're right. if you think pair programming is two programmers stacked on top of each other (??), if you think the most likely outcome of two coworkers sitting down together is arguing, if you think nothing getting done is an acceptable result of "personalities clashing," or that the end result of pair programming is supposed to be two units of work, yes, pair programming is not for you. Pie Colony fucked around with this message at 05:18 on Sep 21, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2018 05:14
|
|
|
qhat posted:noone is "right" you loving retard. it's tool which is useful for a subset of people on a subset of projects, not something which should be followed dogmatically in all or even most situations.  you don't even know why or how pair programming is used, why do you think you know which subset of people or projects it should be used for?e: also don't use the r word Pie Colony fucked around with this message at 06:05 on Sep 21, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2018 06:01
|
|
|
- your resume isn't pretty to look at. nested bullet lists, no formatting... at least bold the headers or something - agreed about the skills section. also at least for me "C/C++" is a red flag. it doesn't even look like you wrote any C at your job? - it's fine that you worked at the same company for 10 years, but is stuff like "wrote utility scripts to support customer operations" the most exciting thing you can write about it? it's also helpful to include the results of your work rather than just the work itself - for your internship, you have 3 bullet points that contain 1 thing you did. and that one thing you end with "etc." this is a resume, your work experience is not something you should yadda yadda over - i'd also probably remove the training section but idk
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2018 13:59
|
|
|
MononcQc posted:Since many of us had decent managers that did allow to go for more than the default N weeks (2-4 years for juniors-tech lead ranks iirc) drat that's a good vacation policy also, i'm taking interviews at 2nd choice companies right now to prepare for my 1st choice companies, but the interviews for the latter will most likely happen much later. what's the downside of accepting an offer knowing that if another offer was made in ~1 month i'd jump ship?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 9, 2018 16:30
|
|
|
why would you even ask that though? are you trying to hire the other candidates? learn what the interviewer's bar for impressive is? cause it doesn't really tell you anything about the company
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2018 03:32
|
|
|
yeah but like (1) you ask that of the interviewer after they are already done interviewing you, and (2) for you it literally doesn't matter what caliber of candidates they're interviewing. idk seems like a weird question to me
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2018 03:37
|
|
|
"what's the most impressive thing you've seen from a coworker" definitely seems like a better question, though as an interviewer i'd still probably take several minutes to come up with an answer (despite working with lots of smart people) since so many impressive things are a team effort i've had so many interviews run over (both as an interviewer and interviewee) and the first thing to get cut is time for questions. so as an interviewee if i only have a couple of minutes to learn about the place i'll spend the next couple years of my life at, i'd go for questions that give more information rather than, like the previous poster said, probably never hearing a red flag but maybe getting some small talk out of it
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2018 04:13
|
|
|
use sites like interviewing.io / pramp to practice
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2018 17:15
|
|
|
previously i asked how much of a dick i would be if i started working knowing i'd leave in 1-2 months if given the chance. on here and in real life pretty much everyone said "a big one." is this better: accepting an offer, but drawing it out and pushing back on the start date knowing if i got another offer in 2-3 weeks i'd take it instead? and remember this is keeping in mind that corporations are soulless and evil
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2018 01:57
|
|
|
Jabor posted:Do you actually have interviews and stuff lined up that you're expecting might make you an offer, or is it a super-vague "well what if a recruiter calls me out of the blue immediately after I've signed the contract" thing? i have two onsites for Big Corps (see: slow corps) i'm in the process of scheduling, but i have to make a call on the other offers before they happen or at least definitely before i hear back e: for full context, i did mention i have offers, they are speeding me along, it still won't work out, the other companies are really bland but a decent amount of figgies Pie Colony fucked around with this message at 02:56 on Oct 24, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2018 02:52
|
|
|
i’m not at all a manager, but i can appreciate its difficulty. there are fewer discrete things you can measure. but i think the appeal of going into management boils down to two things: (1) it’s, unless you’re seriously talented, a way to jump into higher figgies quicker, and (2) the value you get is derived not from your individual contributions but how much you can empower other individual contributors into being more efficient. the two are actually linked: there’s an upper cap to how productive you can be as an individual, but as a manager you affect and realize productivity gains for an entire group, so you have more business value. obviously there are other considerations (e.g. how much you like meetings and talking to people) but if that premise sounds intriguing you might enjoy management.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 31, 2018 00:56
|
|
|
welp, my job search is finally over. took about 2 months from start to finish, though it helped that i wasn't working during that time. ended up doing 7 onsites and getting 4 offers. now i'm moving forward with a Big Tech Co that's offering 185k base/15% bonus/80k signing/500k rsus (for reference this is NYC). as you can imagine i'm REALLY happy about that, my last job was a flat 130k, and i've come a long way from my first job six years ago making 60k. time to crack open a cold beer or 5
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2018 22:10
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:jesus christ i'm still not really sure how this happened, but when the recruiter asked me for a first number, i said something like 170k base. my other offer at the time was 10k lower, and that's already more money than i know what to do with. then HE counter-offered with 180k base, 50k signing. a couple days later i accepted the offer. he calls back the next day and says he was able to get me 5k more base and 30k more signing. god bless that guy
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2018 14:32
|
|
|
Gazpacho posted:constantly bummed in phone interviews about having to choose whether to pause and gather my thoughts, which makes interviewers panic, or just speak from the cuff and come out completely incoherent why don't you just say "let me think about this for a second" or something
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2018 05:15
|
|
|
KoRMaK posted:oh my god I just realized that interviewing for programming jobs is its own loving field that you could spend hours doing. Like part time amount of hours learning all these loving katas and different dev processes like tdd or ddd. It's it's own specialized field. How annoying. This came rushing to me as I read this as I was giving a new friend recommendations i mean, yeah, interviewing is a separate skill from programming, which is a separate skill from software development. unless you're really really good at one of them, you usually need to be decent at all three (but you don't need to be great) so yeah you need to practice it separately. honestly study outlines, interviewing books, practice problems, and practice interviews are going to be more productive than this thread (i say this as someone who read every single post in this thread during my job search). but the great thing is you can usually do this on your employers' time because you're leaving anyway Pie Colony fucked around with this message at 05:15 on Nov 9, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2018 04:47
|
|
|
also treating it like a separate thing means you treat the process differently if a company passed on me because i didn't know domain-driven design, that doesn't mean i think i'm a bad developer, or that the interviewing process is poo poo the process is actually working, it's telling me that company is bad, and i probably wouldn't want to work there
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2018 04:50
|
|
|
it means writing failing unit tests before writing an implementation. then you implement what you need to make the tests pass. so that's why you wouldn't want to think of an algorithm before writing tests. at least i think, i've never done TDD
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2018 05:19
|
|
|
Kind Friend posted:is it a dumb idea to try to push my start date back a week after i've already accepted the offer? worried it might come off as a bad look but dang it'd be really nice to have a little extra breathing room. i asked for a month before starting (and got it), despite the recruiter knowing i haven’t been working for the last 8 months taking as much time off as possible between jobs is very important, and if you already have the job there’s really no harm in asking
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2018 01:33
|
|
|
Ciaphas posted:at least an application a day (usually more but trending down, frankly) and still no onsites (only 2 phone screenings) as of a month in to anxious "unemployment" like it is a numbers game to an extent, and the process is slow at some places, but if you are a month in after sending 30-50 applications and only received 2 phone interviews, the problem is your resume Pie Colony fucked around with this message at 20:54 on Nov 19, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2018 20:46
|
|
|
Ciaphas posted:pretty much just comes down to I'm Not Good Enough imo vOv we've already established interviewing is a separate skill from programming, and doing poorly/well on one doesn't mean you'll do poorly/well on the other i remember you posting your resume the first time. it got a lot better, but there are still things i'd change for example: - working with security clearance / without internet access: is this relevant to the jobs you're applying to? it's useful to tailor your resume to the specific job/position you're applying to. if you're e.g. applying to web companies, i doubt they'd care about this (also it might help if you mentioned what kind of positions you're applying to) - phrases like "enabled rapid prototyping" and "improved offsite debugging" are sorta vague. "added dynamic per-article control" is fine but bland. you should include the most interesting technical challenges you've faced, even if they comprised .01% of the total work you did. - there are grammar mistakes and weird phrasing. "directly and daily work" -- work is a verb and a noun here. "migrating... to, and maintaining, Git host" -- just sounds a bit off. also i'm not at all a designer, but some of the design choices seem weird (bolding/coloring the first letter of each header, using 3 or 4 different ways to bring attention to a phrase) going through it i feel like i'm just nitpicking and pointing out what _i_ would have written, so take my advice with a grain of salt but like if i were trying to play up my experience and play down the fact that i've only been with one company, i'd split out the experience section for each title i had. like my current resume has a separate company/title/dates held section for both my time as a senior and mid-level at the same company
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2018 21:33
|
|
|
other companies don't need to know that. in fact they don't even need to know the titles themselves, they just want to see that you were growing and not just doing the same thing over and over to that end if you can say something like you mentored juniors or did more architectural work or whatever makes you sound more senior, that could also help
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2018 21:42
|
|
|
quote:Don't come to the bay quote:Don't do web work
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2018 01:33
|
|
|
Gazpacho posted:
is your problem getting interviews or converting interviews into offers? either way, my advice: - remove your summary, you think it's saying something but it's really not. similarly with the italicized words and technologies you listed at the top - get your resume down to one page. saying things like "participated in agile planning and development" is fluff -- you are just saying you did your job. call out the most interesting things about your jobs, the things that not every other developer in the world is doing - be more specific with your bullet points. "implemented product features" means absolutely nothing - i don't really get this format where you say half the things you did in paragraph format and half the things you did with bullet points - if you are having trouble getting your resume down to one page, you don't really have to list school courses you took in 1997 Pie Colony fucked around with this message at 06:31 on Dec 6, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2018 06:28
|
|
|
oh you just use maven? i apply maven build technology  (just joking, i think you have a lot of experience and pretty smart, guy, but yeah you should be more direct with your language)
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2018 06:40
|
|
|
Gazpacho posted:the purpose of the summary blurb is pack in fluff phrases that tend to appear in job descriptions and increase rankings in an automated matching system. whether it's effective at that, I can't say i have never seen the internals of recruiting software, but i promise you it's not looking for "highly productive guy working independently and collaborating." just remove it
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2018 06:42
|
|
|
Gazpacho posted:ok here's my one page it's definitely better than what you used to have, so nice job. but you should still remove the summary section, it's basically a less informative version of your "technology skills" and half the things you list on it don't actually mean anything i'd also probably cull the technology skills section just because it looks so busy, but that's more minor. like is anyone really skilled at JSON? my rule of thumb is only listing things i would be comfortable/interested working with full time
|
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2018 22:45
|
|
|
also being more specific with your bullet points is good. like what kinds of secure coding practices? how was the new service you coded useful for your company? numbers are very specific. what was the failure rate before and after you implemented your renderer? i'm assuming you don't actually know but it's okay to fudge the numbers in situations like this
|
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2018 22:50
|
|
|
if you do something with a technology more interesting than "use it" it should probably be called out separately somewhere else (e.g. under jobs or personal projects)
|
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2018 22:54
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 12, 2024 01:45 |
|
|
BigCo was also the only place that gave me a background check, most of the smaller startups asked for references. there was one job at a 10 person startup that i got entirely because i had one good reference (as in, i didn't have to interview at all). if it is going toward the way of background checks i guess i guess i'm glad tho
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2018 23:55
|
|