[Novashi]

>Feels like it's a very high false positive rate and one that pushes all the time costs onto the applicant (multiply ~2hr by say 5 companies that want you to do a coding challenge).

It is, I wouldn't entertain companies that do this unless you really need a position.

This is the trifecta of bad interviewing tests:

- No compensation

- Stupidly restrictive time limit

- High chance of not getting feedback

Personally I would turn them down and then explain these three things. There are plenty of companies with less annoying hoops.

[eikenberry]

> - Stupidly restrictive time limit

This one kills the chance of my applying by itself. Turns what could be a interesting coding challenge into an exam, ruining the fun of it. I could see junior devs going through this to get some experience but why would anyone past that point in their career bother when there are so many options?

[dajohnson89]

Because the companies that do the coding exams pay well, have high prestige, use tech that he likes, etc. It's not always so simple to just refuse to go through an annoying interview process, even if it sucks.

[eikenberry]

Of course there will be exceptions to any rule. But in general it is still a good rule.

[sys_64738]

> - No compensation

Curious if anybody has ever billed the interviewing company for their time if they didn't get the job.

[_asummers]

Not the same thing but I’ve read that Square pays people for coming to their on site interview because it’s a full day. Unsure if that is still the case.