[triplebytelol]

Throwaway, because I'm well-known on HN.

I ran the TripleByte course once, and it was 100% not worth my time as a professional.

The "coding test" was criminally simple, but got me in the door quickly for an interview. I spent a number of hours building out projects with a paired interviewer, as well as answering questions. This part I enjoyed, it felt like a nice back and forth while building an interesting bit of software. It was like an open discussion, and getting to tap away on my laptop was such an enjoyable time.

Then came the technical questions. The interviewer asked if I knew anything about a specific Technology X. I'd list the tech here by name, but it's so specific I'm afraid of it being linked back to me. It's not something most engineers would run into.

I responded with "I have not worked with that, I've heard of it" as well as it never being listed on my resume or professional work. The interviewer went ahead and simplified it down for us to discuss, much like "Ok well it works like this, so let's chat abstractly". I went along with the discussion since I figured it would be fine to chat abstractly about a technology I never worked with.

The interview concluded, we parted ways and I thought things went very well.

The following days later I received an e-mail from Triplebyte. They praised my clean code and thought process, but specifically said my weakness in said Technology X, which I would like to call out again I never worked with professional nor had it listed as a skill or on my resume, was too much to consider me for the next round.

TripleByte literally evaluated, and discounted me, on not knowing an uncommon bit of technology. Just what the hell.

I was shocked at the levels of failures that occurred to reach this point. It was unfair to use that as any benchmark, and unfair to waste a day of my time doing that. It was a smack in the face to an industry vet like myself.

I tell all job seekers to stay far, far away from TripleByte for this reason. They're not really changing the game at all, but like to pretend they are the magic answer.

One footnote: I'm an engineer at one of the giants (Google, Amazon, Apple, Microsoft, etc) who was and is way more qualified than anything TripleByte was or is pushing out.

[taurath]

The giants fail people for the same reasons as well. I've learned over time that qualifications matter far far less than interview skills at software companies, and even a maximally qualified person only has a 60-70% chance of passing any arbitrary interview.

[Cyph0n]

That first sentence, if true, already narrows the search space drastically for anyone who wants to find you, especially given the length of your comment.

[khazhoux]

Plot twist: it's pg!

[meggar]

You can always learn Technology X and try again.

[zdky]

Before reaching any conclusions, would you let us know how specific is Technology X? Is it like a library or a framework? How uncommon is that?

If it's something commonly used by lots of developers and needed by lots of companies, I think it'd be fair to think of it as a bad signal at least.

The giants (Google, etc) have great engineers, but they also often use technologies that's very different from the general public.

Being an engineer from those companies are great, but it doesn't automatically qualify you for any job on the market.

[vonmoltke]

> Before reaching any conclusions, would you let us know how specific is Technology X? Is it like a library or a framework? How uncommon is that?

> If it's something commonly used by lots of developers and needed by lots of companies, I think it'd be fair to think of it as a bad signal at least.

From GP:

> I'd list the tech here by name, but it's so specific I'm afraid of it being linked back to me. It's not something most engineers would run into.

GP specifically said it it isn't something "something commonly used by lots of developers and needed by lots of companies".