1 - ok they know PHP?! Ask them to write a simple function (whiteboard will do it), but you also can ask the to do 'homework' or set up a dev env. in a laptop
2 - same for MySQL, do they know how to write a select, do they know how to use PhpMyAdmin at least?
If they refuse to do it then go for difficult questions. If they won't answer, just send them home
I'd be interested in hearing why you think it's broken. I unfortunately probably can't comment on it, but I can if convinced try to influence the process.
Eivind.
What I'd say:
- The threshold is high ( I guess you have to get 90% of the questions right, or something) - The process is very long and involved - Some questions are factual and can be looked up in 2 seconds - Your CV is worth nothing (it's probably just the
'admission', still)
And even though the process is involved, it's spotty, meaning that different interviews will get different results, for the same person.
IQ tests can sometimes outperform subject-specific tests even for determining future performance in that specific subject. This occurs especially when everyone tested is known to already posses the basic knowledge of a field.
You seem to think that a question about "knowing stuff" cannot have an IQ loading. It doesn't work that way and the more so the harder the questions are. The way to know if the Google hiring process is highly IQ loaded is to measure people's IQ and compare that to their interview score. If you think IQ isn't relevant I think you'd be surprised.
I'm not saying Google's test is not IQ loaded, on the contrary, it's very loaded. Maybe google will let someone test it, but still...
But the main problem is that, to get to the point in the interview where only IQ matters you need to know A LOT of things. Think of it like doing a test in a foreign language.
And I may have come across being too 'IQ is irrelevant', as I answered to someone else, I'd take IQ over experience for example.
People can increase their knowledge if they have a high IQ, but people cannot increase their IQ no matter how much they know of their subject.
True! But sometimes for short term projects you need the person that knows something NOW. For most of the time, not really.
One of the interesting things we've found, when trying to predict how well somebody we've hired is going to perform when we evaluate them a year or two later, is one of the best indicators of success within the company was getting the worst possible score on one of your interviews. We rank people from one to four, and if you got a one on one of your interviews, that was a really good indicator of success.
Google tests are (way) better than IQ, but guess what Google found out: the best performers are the ones who have the lowest scores on their interviews.
IQ is not concerned with - the candidate knows about the job - the candidate has good (enough) people skills - the candidate showers, shaves, etc
Curiously enough the ion engines failed big on this one...
they had 3 engines. They would stop working, then get back to work, etc. They had to "take parts" of one ion engine and fit it on another engine (all electrically of course)
Yeah, I mean, you have the whole emptiness of space to park, but nooooo, you have to park right next to it, don't you. And then you open the door and hit it on the asteroid, isn't it...
Even though I agree with Solar thermal and find it much more viable than solar-cells, I don't think it "needs" 2 billion. Not sure where solar-cells can go and even if they can outpace solar-thermal (it has its problems as well, still)
But good work usually brings recognition in math, I mean, not many "pop mathematicians"
I'm not sure how this plays out in the math field, as opposed to tech field, I'm more used to, where about 70% of works are irrelevant/dead ends/redundant/not even trying/etc.
Gee, do you mean that to be a true mathematician you have to be a social outcast and refuse a $1M dollar price while unemployed... Andrew Wiles would like a word
And then people are supposed to not feel weird about the stereotype
Don't think of this as physical placement, but logical placement.
You can do this in a remote even though the batteries are side by side and if their connection is serial or parallel is irrelevant (ok, if it's parallel it will probably go out in smoke if you place them wrong, still)
You're right, but still, what happens usually is that you have two compartments side by side (either holes or slots) and then a wire connecting two batteries next to each other.
And that 'wire' is placed usually in a space constrained place (like a lid, in digital cameras)
Slashdot Mirror
It's the only way
1 - ok they know PHP?! Ask them to write a simple function (whiteboard will do it), but you also can ask the to do 'homework' or set up a dev env. in a laptop
2 - same for MySQL, do they know how to write a select, do they know how to use PhpMyAdmin at least?
If they refuse to do it then go for difficult questions. If they won't answer, just send them home
for homeopathy!1111 :P :P
Just kidding :P
But in reality we usually look at 'first facts' and feel they are more credible.
It's not much as lies... if you heard first "A is good" you'll keep thinking that, the same with "A is bad" regardless if A is good or bad in reality
Actually some of my posts shoot to +5 then end up in +3 or even 0 ./ spergs?! Seems to be more likely than we think.
So "go into the light!!!11" doesn't work for shrimp?!
How does shrimp kill themselves?! They use a pistol...
A film producer had his film stolen, and the thief got a lot of money for the screenings.
The producer that ended penniless: Georges Melies
The Thief: Thomas Edison
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Trip_to_the_Moon
I'd be interested in hearing why you think it's broken. I unfortunately probably can't comment on it, but I can if convinced try to influence the process.
Eivind.
What I'd say:
- The threshold is high ( I guess you have to get 90% of the questions right, or something)
- The process is very long and involved
- Some questions are factual and can be looked up in 2 seconds
- Your CV is worth nothing (it's probably just the
'admission', still)
And even though the process is involved, it's spotty, meaning that different interviews will get different results, for the same person.
IQ tests can sometimes outperform subject-specific tests even for determining future performance in that specific subject. This occurs especially when everyone tested is known to already posses the basic knowledge of a field.
You seem to think that a question about "knowing stuff" cannot have an IQ loading. It doesn't work that way and the more so the harder the questions are. The way to know if the Google hiring process is highly IQ loaded is to measure people's IQ and compare that to their interview score. If you think IQ isn't relevant I think you'd be surprised.
I'm not saying Google's test is not IQ loaded, on the contrary, it's very loaded. Maybe google will let someone test it, but still...
But the main problem is that, to get to the point in the interview where only IQ matters you need to know A LOT of things. Think of it like doing a test in a foreign language.
And I may have come across being too 'IQ is irrelevant', as I answered to someone else, I'd take IQ over experience for example.
People can increase their knowledge if they have a high IQ, but people cannot increase their IQ no matter how much they know of their subject.
True! But sometimes for short term projects you need the person that knows something NOW. For most of the time, not really.
I'd take IQ over 'years of experience' any time
But sometimes knowing something is more important. Not because people don't learn on the job, but somethings need time to learn.
this is great insight, makes sense!
They don't ask that (or at least, this i 5% of questions)
if you'd googled 'google interview questions' you get a better match
These are a better match even if it looks similar http://www.techinterviews.com/google-interview-questions
http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2008/03/get-that-job-at-google.html
Then go and hire Theodore Kazinski, or maybe Bobby Fischer, their IQ is off the charts.
[quote]Citation needed on Google tests being way better than just an IQ test [/quote]
Maybe because one has to do with skills related to the job and the other doesn't. Do you even know what kind of questions google asks? Well, I do.
[quote]and yet IQ tests still predict performance very well in many jobs. It's both fantastic [/quote]
Depends on the job. Get out of the lab and onto the real world.
But it's ok you can start your own software company and hire people with the highest IQs and see what happens.
Google had every reason to use IQ for hiring and still it doesn't. It's about 70% 'knowing stuff'.
Thanks for that
It's really interesting, and actually, VW quoted correctly but put the wrong spin on it.
As he said in the first quote (and he repeats that on his remarks after) is a low score on ONE interview.
But I disagree with him on saying it's not broken (but it's ok since he's not going to badmouth his employer)
http://gawker.com/5392947/googles-broken-hiring-process
And I quote Peter Norvig
One of the interesting things we've found, when trying to predict how well somebody we've hired is going to perform when we evaluate them a year or two later, is one of the best indicators of success within the company was getting the worst possible score on one of your interviews. We rank people from one to four, and if you got a one on one of your interviews, that was a really good indicator of success.
IQ is highly overrated
In practice, it's almost useless...
Google tests are (way) better than IQ, but guess what Google found out: the best performers are the ones who have the lowest scores on their interviews.
IQ is not concerned with
- the candidate knows about the job
- the candidate has good (enough) people skills
- the candidate showers, shaves, etc
Guess they shouldn't bother and go straight here then http://www.kids-iq-tests.com/famous-people.html
Curiously enough the ion engines failed big on this one...
they had 3 engines. They would stop working, then get back to work, etc. They had to "take parts" of one ion engine and fit it on another engine (all electrically of course)
Yeah, I mean, you have the whole emptiness of space to park, but nooooo, you have to park right next to it, don't you. And then you open the door and hit it on the asteroid, isn't it...
Bastard
Actually, it teaches you PHP if you're on the cast of '24 hours'
Even though I agree with Solar thermal and find it much more viable than solar-cells, I don't think it "needs" 2 billion. Not sure where solar-cells can go and even if they can outpace solar-thermal (it has its problems as well, still)
I don't know a lot about geothermal, though.
Oh, now I get his problem!!
It's 1 million dollars, that's like, just an integer...
They should have presented him with an elliptic equation.
Good point.
But good work usually brings recognition in math, I mean, not many "pop mathematicians"
I'm not sure how this plays out in the math field, as opposed to tech field, I'm more used to, where about 70% of works are irrelevant/dead ends/redundant/not even trying/etc.
Gee, do you mean that to be a true mathematician you have to be a social outcast and refuse a $1M dollar price while unemployed... Andrew Wiles would like a word
And then people are supposed to not feel weird about the stereotype
Grigory is a prime example of mental disease.
Except if you have your security customer-side, you're doing it wrong.
Don't think of this as physical placement, but logical placement.
You can do this in a remote even though the batteries are side by side and if their connection is serial or parallel is irrelevant (ok, if it's parallel it will probably go out in smoke if you place them wrong, still)
You're right, but still, what happens usually is that you have two compartments side by side (either holes or slots) and then a wire connecting two batteries next to each other.
And that 'wire' is placed usually in a space constrained place (like a lid, in digital cameras)
Let's say it use 2 batteries and the user place them like this
[- +}{+ -]
Well... doesn't look like it's going to work...