Slashdot Mirror


How To Hire a Hacker

itwbennett writes "If you want to hire a hacker, you need to take a more psychology-based approach to the entire interview process to determine whether he or she has changed their ways enough to be a trustworthy employee, says Mich Kabay in a recent Network World blog post. But this approach is also 'germane for highly skilled staffers, even those that don't come with arrest records or who have done something questionable in their pasts,' says David Strom. For example, in your next interview, ask a question that will suss out how much of a sense of entitlement a candidate has — or how much you or your company has. 'One time when I interviewed with Microsoft in Redmond I couldn't get over this sense of corporate entitlement — it was one of the biggest turn-offs that I had during my interviewing day there,' says Strom. 'I got the feeling that I wasn't going to fit in, no matter how smart I thought (or they thought) I was.'"

38 of 370 comments (clear)

  1. Sounds more like by wampus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sounds more like "how to hire a self important misanthrope" to me.

    1. Re:Sounds more like by Jewbird · · Score: 4, Funny

      If you aren't hiring self-important misanthropes, you aren't even trying.

      --
      For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods
    2. Re:Sounds more like by CAIMLAS · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Calling such people "misanthrope" is a bit harsh, I think.

      Someone who is intelligent, competent, and has a difficult time finding acceptance (or even a modicum of comfort-with-others) in new environments could very easily get falsely labeled a misanthrope. If they're capable and know up from down, calling them self-important is a wee bit counter-productive - and I dare say, quite possibly why they'd be viewed as misanthropic.

      A better characteristic descriptor would probably be "socially clueless". I know a lot of guys who come across harsh - myself included. They are usually some of the most open people I've known; they're also very amiable - but havent' a clue how to relate to others unlike themselves.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    3. Re:Sounds more like by Nefarious+Wheel · · Score: 5, Insightful
      I have a friend in the high energy physics field. Four advanced degrees. I had the good fortune to have hired him as a contractor once when I was in a narrow bind, and I know he's bright. A bloody Klieg light amongst candles.

      He's also often distressed by the stupidity of the people he works with. "Mate" I said, "Everybody you work with will be stupider than you. Get used to it."

      I don't know if it helped much, but it's indicative. In a world of so-so thinkers, any bright sparks will have trouble fitting in. And it takes a fairly bright spark to be even a mediocre sysadmin, to be honest.

      --
      Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
    4. Re:Sounds more like by SpaceLifeForm · · Score: 4, Insightful

      About 90% of people in the world *are* stupid.

      It's not their fault. They have been mis-educated,
      and are easily distracted. They really are clueless
      more than stupid. And they don't care that they
      don't know what is really going on.

      --
      You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.
    5. Re:Sounds more like by Nefarious+Wheel · · Score: 4, Insightful

      About 90% of people in the world *are* stupid

      You are under arrest for egregious misuse of statistics.

      --
      Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
    6. Re:Sounds more like by Glonoinha · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Actually that's because most 'team building exercises' suck.

      You want to build the most amazing team that ever graced your workplace? Send the three or four of them to Vegas or Miami or someplace that has TROUBLE for them to get into under the pretenses of a training class or a seminar, and only get them one car. That will insure they get in a ton of trouble together. When they get back, they will be tighter than any team you've ever seen, and they will get serious amounts of amazing work done. And the three or four of them will work so well together for the rest of their tenure - they will kick the snot out of any teams built over an afternoon playing blindfolded Monopoly and drinking non-alcoholic beverages or whatever the current fad in weak ass team building exercises is this season.

      Disclaimer - trouble in moderation. I'm talking going to strip clubs and drifting the rental car around corners, not burying a dead hooker in the desert.
      That said - a team that does the latter will be a LOT tighter than the team that does the former. Or so I've heard.

      --
      Glonoinha the MebiByte Slayer
    7. Re:Sounds more like by TheModelEskimo · · Score: 5, Interesting

      That's nice, unless you work in a place that's even mildly diverse, where you have people like Kevin the married Mormon who is into skydiving, Samir the introvert muslim who regularly takes prayer breaks and loves Sunny-D, and Tammi the feminist who enjoys electronic music and builds analog synths in her spare time.

      No, I think your amazing team-building system would work best with extroverted dopey white guys aged 20 - 30 and see nothing wrong with TV. Mooks, basically. It assumes a non-diverse team, so by definition it's a weak way to build teams in general.

    8. Re:Sounds more like by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Informative

      Team building does simply not work out. You cannot build a team. It happens or it does not. It's just that simple.

      If you really insist in "building" a team out of people who don't know jack each other, simple way: Grab them all for an afternoon, put them in a pub, sit down with them and get them drunk. Really drunk. Then have them talk. You'll have a team the next morning some of the times. And if not, you at least got a good hangover out of it on corporate pay.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    9. Re:Sounds more like by rho · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Except for a few biologically retarded individuals, I've found that most people aren't stupid at all. Instead they're narrowly focussed in their intelligence.

      So Jim Bob may not know Sartre from Sasquatch, but he intimately knows a Chevy big-block engine. Or how to skin and clean a deer with a broken Coke bottle. Or some damn thing. He's intelligent and capable within some narrow parameters, and he's happy when he stays within them.

      It's the pervasive and rigid modern school system that divides people into "smart" and "stupid".

      --
      Potato chips are a by-yourself food.
    10. Re:Sounds more like by Mr+Z · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There's also the difference between "intelligent" and "informed." There are plenty of otherwise intelligent people that ignorant on topics that they're asked to weigh in on. Ignorance is a bigger problem than lack of intelligence, I'd say. This dovetails nicely into your observation.

      To see the effects of institutionalized ignorance, look at all the wasted intellectual effort of the Dark Ages. You have bright minds of the day debating over how many angels could dance on the head of a pin, as opposed to advancing science and engineering. Imagine if all that effort had gone into developing the steam engine a few hundred years before James Watt got to it.

  2. Had any scary interviews? by WaywardGeek · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Like a lot of big geeks on Slashdot, I take pride in always receiving a job offer after an interview... accept once. Once I interviewed with the EDIF reader group at Cadence, and the manager had exactly one technical question for me: "Do you understand recursion?" "Well... yes I do." "Well, then, you have all the skills that matter. What really counts is that you know how to fit in, and you don't impress me there."

    I'm still shaken up over that interview.

    --
    Celebrate failure, and then learn from it - Nolan Bushnell
    1. Re:Had any scary interviews? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Do you also take pride in fucking up heterographs?

    2. Re:Had any scary interviews? by ezratrumpet · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Marshall Goldsmith nailed this in "What Got You Here Won't Get You There."

      In many (most?) business structures, expertise only gets us so far - after that, it's all about how we deal with people.

      If you want to have a part in the problem-solving drama called "Your Employing Company," you have to get along well enough to be allowed at the table.

      There's not much justice or fairness in this - just some hard reality along with enough exceptions to make the rule fuzzy.

    3. Re:Had any scary interviews? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      You inthenthitive clod!

    4. Re:Had any scary interviews? by Nefarious+Wheel · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'm still shaken up over that interview.

      Don't be. Although one can often tell in the first five minutes of an interview if you want the geek or not (I'm being generous with the time here) that sort of perfunctory questioning and the glib dismissal you received most likely means they already someone else had in mind for the job, and are just following procedure at this point - often you're competing with an internal promotion or other reasons not related to technical competence.

      Where you might need to improve is in believing your first impressions about a firm interviewing you. Hunches count, and your ability to drive the interview the way you want is a good indication of what level of person they're really after. I wasn't there, but my off-the-cuff opinion is that you were either bloody well jobbed, or the juxtaposition of the "Reader" group in the name and your choice of words (e.g. an "accept once" in your resume) was a deal killer. But they shouldn't have brought you in if that were the case.

      Disclosure: I've interviewed about five hundred candidates for technical jobs. I've hired one hundred, of which two turned out to be poor choices. It's a serious, expensive business to bring the right people on board.

      --
      Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
  3. Re:5 min by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Put a gun to his head, give him a blowjob and tell him to break AES256?

  4. On Personality by overbaud · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Another problem is that some criminal hackers may exhibit traits associated with clinical personality disorders such as the narcissistic personality disorder." I'd say a large amount of IT staff exhibit personality disorders. Not just 'hackers'.

    --
    Users... the only thing keeping 1st level support from being the bottom feeders.
    1. Re:On Personality by ignavus · · Score: 4, Informative

      "Another problem is that some criminal hackers may exhibit traits associated with clinical personality disorders such as the narcissistic personality disorder." I'd say a large amount of IT staff exhibit personality disorders. Not just 'hackers'.

      It is a job requirement. If we got on well with other people, how would we spend enough time alone with computers to become experts?

      --
      I am anarch of all I survey.
  5. Think this one needs a Part 2 by mysidia · · Score: 5, Interesting

    How to Fire a Hacker

    (Without getting pwned by her/him or his/her friends)

    Because (let's face it), there's a chance you hired one on accident, without realizing it, and that they don't have an arrest record, for one reason or another.

  6. This article seems to be anti-hacker by mysidia · · Score: 4, Informative

    I consider this blatant hacker discrimination morally reprehensible.

    Is hacker culture so bad that anyone who identifies as a hacker needs to pass special scrutiny?

    Isn't it a bit insulting to the hacker community to say they shouldn't be hired, unless they've "reformed", and imply they have arrest records, suggesting they are all criminals ?

    Perhaps you mean cracker

    1. Re:This article seems to be anti-hacker by Timothy+Brownawell · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Perhaps you mean cracker

      "If I was a real cracker, I'd want to be topped with a real cheese, maybe a strong stilton."

      And I thought "hacker" actually meant someone who (literally) hacked on things. With a hatchet or similar. Or maybe language just changes, and we need to all get over it.

    2. Re:This article seems to be anti-hacker by bennomatic · · Score: 4, Funny

      Mmmm. Crackers make me hungry. I'm a snacker.

      --
      The CB App. What's your 20?
    3. Re:This article seems to be anti-hacker by nacturation · · Score: 5, Funny

      And I thought "hacker" actually meant someone who (literally) hacked on things. With a hatchet or similar.

      So more like Hans Reiser?

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
  7. In fairness by SlappyBastard · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The article is about how to not hire a self important misanthrope.

    --
    I scream. You scream. I assume that means we're both acquainted with the problem. We proceed.
    1. Re:In fairness by e9th · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I wonder how Terry Childs would have done if the guy who hired him had read this?

  8. I was hoping there was a joke in there by SlappyBastard · · Score: 5, Funny

    When you said that he asked, "Do you understand recursion?" I was hoping that you'd say, "Then after that, he asked, 'Do you understand recursion?' And I said yes. And then he asked . . . (wait for it) . . . 'Do you understand recursion?'"

    I'm sorry. It just felt like a setup for a joke about recursion.

    --
    I scream. You scream. I assume that means we're both acquainted with the problem. We proceed.
    1. Re:I was hoping there was a joke in there by plover · · Score: 5, Funny
      --
      John
    2. Re:I was hoping there was a joke in there by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny
  9. The joke was too easy by MyLongNickName · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The interviewee must answer: "Yes, but to fully understand it, you must first understand recursion"

    --
    See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
  10. How to... by Darkness404 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The easy way to hire tech people and keep them happy is have them work on, wait for it... technology. That is, most of them, unless they signed up for help desk basically want to be given a problem, some hardware, some software and then them to fix the problem. Thats it, no "team building", no pointless meetings, in general most tech people are happy simply working. The less social interaction with most people is the best.

    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    1. Re:How to... by wampus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's a hard way to make a decent product. If Billy's app doesn't talk to Sue's service because the two never speak to one another or sit down to do a review, it doesn't matter how brilliant either of them is. Their shit still doesn't work.

    2. Re:How to... by Alpha830RulZ · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't agree. If this were true, then the foosball table in our kitchen wouldn't be busy all the time.

      I think it's a subtler truth here. Many technical folks are more comfortable on working technical problems than people problems. Tech problems have at least one right answer that is unambiguous. People problems may not.

      I think the way to keep tech people happy is to give them good problems to work on, serve as a diplomatic layer to insulate them from the annoying people surrounding them in the world, and facilitate making the rules clear on the floor to minimize conflict among the team. And provide free pop.

      --
      I was taught to respect my elders. The trouble is, it's getting harder and harder to find some.
  11. I have an ironic recursion story by plover · · Score: 5, Funny

    A coworker's boss once hired a "programmer" while my buddy was on vacation (avoiding the technical interview in the process.) The guy's first task was a simple program, but it always core dumped. He made no progress trying to get it fixed, so my friend held a code review. Each and every function looked like this:

    void foo()
    {
    ...
    some irrelevant but incomprehensibly bad code;
    ...
    main();
    }

    Yes. He called main() at the bottom of each function. When asked about it, the "programmer" said 'that's so it'll return back to main.'

    I think the biggest mistake we made was not firing that stupid manager on the spot. But I suppose if we fired managers based solely on incompetent decisions, ... well... you know.

    --
    John
  12. Re:Wish I had mod points by Timothy+Brownawell · · Score: 4, Informative

    Because that is an interesting real world scenario to consider in this context. In fact, it would make for a good litmus test: would your hiring process stop the SF admin problem from occurring?

    Particularly given that it's not at all clear that the admin was even the problem...

  13. Re:If you can't beat 'em... by nitehawk214 · · Score: 5, Funny

    ... arrange to have them beaten.

    --
    I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
  14. The catch 22 by fireheadca · · Score: 4, Funny

    A good hacker shouldn't be looking for work. He should be running....

    ---
    When they outlaw computers only outlaws will be free.

  15. Re:Wish I had mod points by e9th · · Score: 4, Informative

    Childs is an interesting case. It seems he's a victim both of his own hubris and of sloppy management.

    I'd like to think that a skilled interviewer could determine whether a person like that would make it in a given organization, but I just don't know. I do think that articles like this help in identifying factors that might help in deciding

    (And who the hell modded you Troll?)