Re:Google's “Director of Engineering” Hiring Test
by kentonv on Thursday October 13, 2016 @09:31PM
(#12705602)
Well, I mean, he's right: any time a story seems outrageous and unbelievable, it's often because it has been embellished at least somewhat. That doesn't mean it's completely false either, though.
Re:Google's “Director of Engineering” Hiring Test
by wpietri on Friday October 14, 2016 @10:26PM
(#12712455)
"Often"? Would you be so kind as to show me your data on that? Maybe it's just this election season, but I seem to be hearing about quite a lot of outrageous things that are perfectly true.
Even if you're correct and he's merely saying something generically true about almost any concerning story, him saying it in the context of the post reads to me as a veiled accusation.
For example, suppose you posted an open-source project of yours here. If I were to comment, "Open-source projects are often half-finished, buggy messes," how would that seem? It is factually true; randomly looking at GitHub projects is enough to show that. But in context, it's an unkind thing to say because encourages people to look at your project as one of them.
> Particularly, when one side presents something that makes the other side look like a blithering idiot, the likelihood it's 100% accurate is, historically, "not great".
I get that you are happy at Google, that you want to defend your employer. But implying the guy's a liar or a fool does not help. If anything, it makes me more likely to believe that Google has something to be touchy about here.