Harder programming questions do a worse job of predicting outcomes

Re:Harder programming questions do a worse job of predicting... by mlthoughts2018 on Monday February 18, 2019 @05:00PM (#19194876)

Not really though. If your price is working in a quiet, private office with a door that shuts, or having humane treatment when you’re being interviewed, then it seems nobody would pay it.

Let’s take their word for it that they are desperate for a machine learning engineer. Then it suggests they care more about mandating workspace conditions (since financial cost even to provide thousands of workers with private offices in dense urban areas is not a realistic excuse not to do it) or trivia during interviews than about business needs.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Harder programming questions do a worse job of predicting... by nybblesio on Monday February 18, 2019 @05:26PM (#19195068)

This is such an important observation. Claims of limited talent pool don't align with reality. If demand were truly inelastic, companies would negotiate.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Harder programming questions do a worse job of predicting... by mlthoughts2018 on Monday February 18, 2019 @06:25PM (#19195425)

In some cases I do think there is a limited talent pool. Unwillingness to negotiate in those cases usually means the company would rather simply suffer along with worse business outcomes, or try to invest in a totally different area of work, than to accept they are at a negotiating disadvantage and that it may be the case that painful company culture changes have to be made (like giving some people private offices and not others).

“The market can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent,” seems apt for this.

[ Parent | on HN ]