Huh? 18 months ago? I've been using it that long - it wasn't able to do that back then....

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44003064

Points: 2

# Comments: 3

I've done a lot of this in the past - I built a platform and apps for consumer-focused location aware in the early 2000's, and another app that ended up with around 12 million users.

When I interviewed at Microsoft Research, we barely talked about my "day job" (fairly straightforward C#/.NET enterprise stuff). They ended up focusing on the side stuff - because it was just me doing the design/architecture/coding/company, it was innovative, it was interesting - and I was super passionate about it.

Today, everyone can use one. They are very powerful, do a lot of things, and are comparatively simple to use - I mean, my MOM can use the damn things, which she never could have done in the 80's and 90's. And with very little support for me!

> re-enter the stream of commerce for potential future criminal use.

Because of course if CASH re-enters the steam of commerce is somehow different?

All good - and I look back at my McDonald days (somewhat) fondly, and it was good experience at doing fairly unpleasant work - but my nights hack and phone freaking and coding had 100x more to do with my success then that first job :)

Personal music at the gym is not new or anything specific to phones

I get at one level a company might like this - it's a "good" way to keep people from leaving. In reality, this means you have people that really want to leave and can't - which does not make for a happy, good employee.

Let them sell at least a portion of the stock back to the company. Or sell some during a funding round, at least enough to cover their taxes so they can take their stock and go.

https://www.amazon.com/Whiteboard-better-hire-best-developer...

I've interviewed and hired a lot of people over the years, and have been interviewed a fair amount. The way a lot of companies do it didn't make sense to me, so 5+ years ago I decided to figure out a better way to do it.

My basic premise in the book is that in an interview when asking someone to show skill, it should be as close as possible to what the job is. Most interviews are just not anything like a whiteboard interview or algorithm question. I get that can show how someone thinks, how they ask questions, etc. - but to be honest I rather have them actually DO something as they would do if I hire them.

I've had a lot of luck with this way of interviewing. The reality is it can still be a crapshoot - you really don't know what someone is going to be like until you work with them for a while - but this at least gets closer to making a more informed decision ('cause you basically work with someone, in a small way!)

Is this something that you'd do? Have you tried something like this for hiring? If so, what was your results?

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20739817

Points: 1

# Comments: 1

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07FJ6N8P1 (the book will be free tomorrow - would love for you to give me some feedback...)

Lighter-weight then this paper - just my experience in using different kinds of tech interviews, and what I found that worked the best for my team and company.

Some key points:

- Interviews should be as close to what the candidate will do in the job - if they'll be writing a lot of code, that's just basic algorithms - on a whiteboard - then whiteboard interviews are perfect. If they will be doing a full project and interact with others as part of that project, then do something more like that (For me, that's a take-home - with an emphasis on the interaction part, and how they go about creating software... not coding). Treat it like a project, not an interview quiz question.

- If doing the takehome, respect peoples time - it needs to enough be close to something they'd do in the job, but something that can be done in a handful of hours (and NEVER treat it like getting free work. I personally would love to be able to do a paid take-home, but haven't had the budget for it) The total expected time of the take-home + onsite should be able what they do for just a full on-site

- Understand that not everyone will have time to do this. Have a backup (my backup is "Project Day", which is on-site, but still about creating software)

- Try to do the same one for all candidates. At my last company, 80+ people ran though the same take-home. The team really started to get a sense of a good result and bad result.. and not JUST on code. What questions did they ask? How did they go about driving the project? What tools did they use?

- I did catch a few people cheating (after 80+, the code was out there, so not hard to cheat). LOOKING at someone else's project for this was ok (if you read the book, you'll see why). Outright copying was not. Part of the process is a friendly code review after the project is done - if the candidate wrote the code, they'll be able to talk to it, and have ideas of how to improve it. If they can't do that and don't see to know the code, they probably didn't write it... which was painfully obvious for those that tried to cheat.

Do what works best for your team and company. This worked best for me; I have yet to see whiteboard interviews be a strong indicator of someone being a great fit for a team, but I was able to build a great, happy, very productive team using this method.

1 Petabyte (and they have multiple) S3 - $30,000 a month, $360,000 a year

S3 - reduced redundancy - $24,000 a month, $288,000 a year

S3 - infrequent access - $13,100 a month, $157,000 a year

Glacier - $7340 a month - $88,000 a year

Not sure how that's not clear...