|
in reply to Re: On Interviewing and Interview Questions
in thread On Interviewing and Interview Questions
But you have to admit, those triva questions are the best ones. They tell me as a potential employee that this is a fad driven company. It tells me that they're not serious about their craft. They aren't looking for professionals to help them solve problems. It sounds more like they're rounding up a bunch of low-level hacks to help a manager meet a hiring quota. It tells me the pay is low, and that they'll expect you to work 60 hour weeks like a freshly minted college grad. I'd guess that this company has a real high turnover rate, much higher than the industry average. But those are the negatives. On the plus side, if you decide to take the job, they're will be some tangible benefits. You'll be able to browse slashdot for hours on end, and no one will complain. You won't have to work very hard, because A) either this company is small, so it will likely be out of business soon, or B) this company is large and a reorganization will eliminate or vastly modify any project you should have been working on. |
Re^3: On Interviewing and Interview Questions
by eyepopslikeamosquito (Archbishop) on Aug 26, 2005 at 19:49 UTC
|
Being able to answer these trivia questions isn't
necessarily a "pass".
Indeed, for some company cultures, "I don't know" may
well be the "pass" answer. After all, as you point out,
maybe they want to avoid hiring fad-driven
developers and cyber-loafers.
Though these questions are quick to ask (and therefore cheap)
for the interviewer, their drawback is that the act of
asking them may well put the applicant off the company --
as you were. I need to re-think these type of questions.
Update:
As pointed out to me by Rhose, and pontificated
on by Paul Graham in
The Python Paradox,
these trivia questions
may also help identify those people who actually
enjoy programming and computers.
| [reply] |
|
|
...these trivia questions may also help identify those people who actually enjoy programming and computers.
Ah, maybe this is one of those things that differenciate programmers and computer scientists? People with an affinity for the informal and social aspects (chattering on the c2 wiki, etc.) become programmers. And people with an affinity for the formal and the mathematical aspects gravitate towards computer science. Thoughts?
| [reply] |
|
