Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by chii 3034 days ago
For a homogenous culture of a large corporation, where each dev is a cog in the system, yes, i would agree that this person will not fit.

If i had a start-up, i would definitely give this person a good old try, because i can tell that he/she is capable enough to churn out rather advanced projects with complexity higher than just CRUD. Programmers of this type is what i'd call 10x, and one should never dismiss a 10x!

3 comments

I'm afraid I have to disagree. They're called 10x engineers because they're 10x as productive, not because you have to take 10x as long to talk them into not using Haskell for a basic CRUD frontend (remember, it's a startup, someone has to do that part - not everything is gonna be sexy to code).

If they're too cool to waste a single second conforming to a basic FizzBuzz test to assert that their resume isn't a lie, they're probably way too cool to do anything but write the most glamorous code in the most visible part of the product - which is the last thing, a startup - with too much work and not enough people, needs.

> using Haskell > too cool to waste a single second

Why are you so quick to extrapolate an entirely new character based on this person not wanting to use HackerRank?

>If they're too cool to waste a single second conforming to a basic FizzBuzz test

I'd be willing to waste 5 minutes tops, unless the employer has put some skin in the game (fizzbuzz is ok - nothing much more than that tho).

There's a 1,000 other employers out there who might be a better a fit. I am not going to do a 1 hour, 30 minute or even 15 minute task if they can't at least even be bothered to pick up the phone to talk to me or glance at my github profile.

Companies that expect completion of a weekend-filling exercise before granting you an interview are universally run by entitled assholes. You're actually doing yourself a favor by screening them out: they'll be bad to work for, you won't get to work with other 10x engineers and the company will likely achieve nothing impressive anyway.

I would be even more hesitant to hire for a startup! can this person grow with the startup? what happens when we have 10, 20, 30+ engineers - how will they work with the team - will they second guess everything? will everything be an argument?

I'm not doubting this persons ability - I'm only responding my opinion of this person based solely on this email.

What kind of startup hesitates to have arguments?

I have never been in a startup that fears arguments. Every startup I have been a part of has lively debates and arguments almost every other day. It's only the large slow moving corporate giants where I see such lack of debate and arguments on what is obviously wrong.

I would go to the extent of saying that a startup that does not encourage arguments in a harmonious fashion would die very soon anyway. Debates and arguments help in weeding out stupid ideas and focus on what that really matters.

This person's email shows that he can have a qualitative argument in a coherent, polite, and non-confrontational fashion - exactly the kind of people you need in startups!

I might agree if the author hadn't clearly listed their (very reasonable) objections to HackerRank near the start of the email.

I wish I had more teammates who could write as effectively.

A meaningful and informed debate is more useful to the company than writing a million lines of code.

You hire people to solve problems, not churn out code. Code is only a tool to solve a problem.

I expect a 10x to be effective, and to know when to pick a fight or not.

In this case, it definitively shows a bent for the innovative and smarts, but shows lack of judgement / wisdom.

For a 10x, merely completing the test is a lot faster and more effective than trying to go change the process from the outside.

Maybe he cares about the industry as a whole? By putting his reasons up publicly, he has triggered a debate about the issue. This seems like a very high cost-benefit ratio to me!