[HN Gopher] Get mock interviews now, pay when you find your next...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Get mock interviews now, pay when you find your next job
        
       Author : leeny
       Score  : 86 points
       Date   : 2022-02-09 14:54 UTC (8 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (blog.interviewing.io)
 (TXT) w3m dump (blog.interviewing.io)
        
       | jaimebuelta wrote:
       | Come on, this interview process is going too far... I think most
       | of the people working in tech knows that the interview process is
       | just plain silly, but we keep doing it because reasons...
       | 
       | And, the worst of it, it doesn't make any sense that for a senior
       | role you get a code interview (or multiple), and then, if you
       | don't pass it, they encourage you to re-apply in 6 months or a
       | year...
        
       | slytherone wrote:
       | I like how this company posts videos of interviews so I can learn
       | from other people
        
         | leeny wrote:
         | Here's the link to our youtube channel if folks wanna see what
         | slytherone is referring to:
         | https://www.youtube.com/c/interviewingio
        
         | decebalus1 wrote:
         | hello fellow hn-ers, I also like how [company] offers this
         | [benefit] to [customers]
        
       | ramesh31 wrote:
       | I don't understand this. Why wouldn't you just practice by
       | interviewing with random companies? If you are hired, just
       | counteroffer with an absurd salary requirement. And if they
       | accept, then congrats you don't need to practice interviewing
       | anymore.
        
         | canti wrote:
         | Not everyone has the luxury of having such an abundance of tech
         | interviews that they can simply use some of them as practice
         | for the "real" interviews
        
         | travisjungroth wrote:
         | Feedback, focus, efficiency.
         | 
         | I did about session a day for maybe two or three weeks. I'll
         | compare it to trying to practice by doing real interviews. I
         | got much more detailed and honest feedback from my practice
         | interviews than any real one I've had. I got to practice just
         | the interview type I wanted, algorithms, without doing other
         | things that would come up in a series of interviews (culture,
         | system design, etc). I also didn't have to contact and
         | coordinate with >= 10 companies to get 10 sessions. I just
         | booked 10 sessions.
        
         | potatochup wrote:
         | I used to do interviews for interviewing.io, and it's a bit
         | different. For my work, I'm not going to give any feedback, and
         | will try leave early if it's not going well. When I was being
         | paid for it via interviewing.io, I would give people fairly
         | detailed feedback on what went well and what went wrong, and
         | also answer any questions the mock candidate had.
        
         | iandouglas wrote:
         | For me, I'd use a platform like interviewing.io where you'll
         | GET actionable feedback -- most companies won't give you
         | feedback at all, other then "here's your offer" or "nah, thanks
         | anyway"
        
       | systemsignal wrote:
       | Anyone have advice for getting to the interview in the first
       | place?
        
         | trhway wrote:
         | just reply to FB/Google/AMZN recruiters. These FAANG companies
         | are basically running "practice-interview-as-a-service", and as
         | a bonus if you happen to like their offer (it seems though that
         | their offers on second and further attempts are pretty low - as
         | you're put into "benchwarmers") you can even spend some time
         | working there.
        
         | leeny wrote:
         | OP here. If you do well in practice, you can book interviews
         | with companies through us (we hire for Amazon, Dropbox,
         | Clubhouse, MongoDB, and a bunch of others). You skip all the
         | recruiter calls and scheduling and just go straight to the real
         | interview.
         | 
         | And if you find a job through us, you don't have to pay for
         | practice.
        
         | sdwolfz wrote:
         | Here is what workred in my recent job search, that just ended
         | this week:
         | 
         | 1. Messgae people on LinkedIn, the more senior in the company,
         | the better. This was by far the fastest and most reliable way
         | for me to get to the first round.
         | 
         | 2. Message the company via a recruiting@, or contact@, even a
         | support@ email they have on their website. Not as reliable as
         | option 1 but better than the job application forms.
         | 
         | 3. Have them contact you via a "HN who is hiring?" post, it's
         | rare, but it does happen.
         | 
         | If it's a job post form, then personally I'd just consider it a
         | loss. Don't know why, it's not like I provide different or less
         | info compared to direct messaging, but that just leaves me
         | ignored for weeks, or rejected with a template message.
        
         | DeWilde wrote:
         | You mean getting past the resume/application stage?
        
       | throwaway158497 wrote:
       | One thing I wish people leeny (who work with hiring managers)
       | tell companies is that as people start hitting 35-40, they dont'
       | have same motivation to solve a trick coding question in 40 min
       | interview. I can demonstrate that I have all the knowledge to do
       | the problem, but if you want me to write compilable (throwaway)
       | code with absolutely no mistakes, you have to loose some
       | candidates. As you age, solving one off puzzles is a nuisance.
        
         | mbrameld wrote:
         | You're saying you can demonstrate that you have the knowledge
         | to do the problem, but you can't actually do the problem? I'm
         | 43 myself, it's not something I do for fun but I can certainly
         | code up a DFS/BFS implementation or something similar in 40
         | minutes. With a modern IDE it's not unreasonable for me to
         | expect it to work correctly on the first try.
        
           | throwaway158497 wrote:
           | Try doing it with coderpad IDE with no autcommplete. On top
           | of that, for Java, make sure you declare everything as
           | static, because top level class has static on it.
           | 
           | A reasonable middle ground is that I demonstrate I know all
           | the concepts in the interview and I can send a fully
           | compilable version after the interview.
           | 
           | >>I'm 43 myself, it's not something I do for fun but I can
           | certainly code up a DFS/BFS implementation or something
           | similar in 40 minutes.
           | 
           | Do you think you can do or have you done this? There is a
           | difference between the two.
        
         | iandouglas wrote:
         | For me it's experience in the industry. If you can see my work
         | history, that I have >25 years in the industry, working for mid
         | and large size companies, and lots and lots of startups, why do
         | I need to do something like a 2-pointer / heap / etc kind of
         | problem to prove I can code?
         | 
         | One of my favorite job offers was literally a conversation that
         | played out like: Manager: Cool, come to our office and meet the
         | team Me: Want me to prep for a tech challenge or something?
         | Manager: Nah, you were employed by ____ for __ years -- if you
         | were incompetent, they would have fired you years ago.
        
       | ggoo wrote:
       | When I was learning how to interview better, I just applied to
       | companies I ethically didn't agree with.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | alasdair_ wrote:
         | I have a friend who does this with companies that he finds
         | morally repugnant, except he takes it a step further and gets
         | free vacations out of it by having them fly him in for the
         | onsite in New York and put him up in a nice hotel the day
         | before and the day after. He usually walks out after a couple
         | of hours and spends the day visiting tourist stuff.
        
           | sickygnar wrote:
           | Sounds like he'd be a perfect fit for those companies
        
           | Kranar wrote:
           | Your friend is morally repugnant.
        
           | bduerst wrote:
           | It sounds more like your friend has found a way to justify
           | deceptively stealing/wasting time and resources by labeling
           | people as morally repugnant.
           | 
           | Yes, it's legal to do, but isn't it a shade hypocritical?
        
             | MeinBlutIstBlau wrote:
        
             | jrm4 wrote:
             | I can't meaningfully distinguish this from "Trying a free
             | sample at Costco with no intent to buy the product."
             | 
             | Aka, who cares?
        
               | thfuran wrote:
               | >I can't meaningfully distinguish this from "Trying a
               | free sample at Costco with no intent to buy the product."
               | 
               | Are you serious?
               | 
               | >Aka, who cares?
               | 
               | Surely the company would rather not waste the money.
        
               | jrm4 wrote:
               | And that is _solely_ the company 's problem.
               | 
               | You either accept that "people who take your free stuff
               | might not be profitable" or you do a better job screening
               | who you give free stuff to. Zoom exists.
        
               | boring_twenties wrote:
               | Not to Godwin the thread, but surely e.g. Nazi Germany
               | would rather not have their factories bombed and their
               | personnel shot at?
        
               | jrm4 wrote:
               | What in the entire fresh heck is this supposed to even
               | mean?
        
             | remram wrote:
             | If a company does shady enough business that it has
             | problems hiring developers, and decides to spend money on
             | flying and lodging remote candidates rather than improve
             | its practices, why should _we_ feel bad about having them
             | spend that money?
             | 
             | You don't force them to do it, you don't lie in your resume
             | that they decided was a desirable candidate. If they can't
             | convince you to come on board, that's on them; hiring is a
             | mutual negotiation.
        
             | tannedNerd wrote:
             | While I personally wouldn't do it, I could see the argument
             | that tying up resources of a morally repugnant company is a
             | worthwhile act because it prevents them being as terrible
             | for a day?
        
             | alasdair_ wrote:
             | I think it depends. When the Iraq war was starting, I could
             | see the justification for wasting a bunch of Haliburton's
             | time as a form of civil disobedience or protest, for
             | example.
             | 
             | Personally though, I don't do this, nor would I. I think
             | it's too easy become corrupt from doing things this way.
        
         | mrtranscendence wrote:
         | I would do this, except even an interview for a position I
         | didn't want would make me dreadfully nervous. There's something
         | about paying for someone to help that reduces the anxiety. That
         | said, I'm not an engineer so this particular service isn't for
         | me.
        
         | m00x wrote:
         | Ironic since this is wasting interviewers' time, making your
         | own ethics questionable.
        
           | powersnail wrote:
           | The interviewer uses work time to interview, so they still
           | get paid for their time. It wastes the company's resources,
           | but not the interviewer's.
        
             | boardwaalk wrote:
             | ... and I'm sure all the programmers on dead end projects
             | out there feel great too!
        
           | haliskerbas wrote:
           | Sometimes you just have to play the game of capitalism.
        
           | blairbeckwith wrote:
           | If you view every minute an interviewer is doing actual work
           | as harmful to the world, then wasting said interviewers time
           | would be even more of an ethical good would it not?
        
             | legostormtroopr wrote:
             | This also assumes that the interviewee has the "right"
             | ethics. From their perspective, yes wasting time in an
             | interview is ethically good to them.
             | 
             | But outsiders may agree with the interviewers ethics, and
             | would see wasting their time as unethical.
        
             | jonathankoren wrote:
             | I know this wasn't your point, but I'd like to call out the
             | common assumption that interviewing isn't "actual work". It
             | is. Recruiting, interviewing, mentoring, all of that is
             | just as important as shipping code.
        
               | gumby wrote:
               | So you could frame that commenter's activity as providing
               | interviewing practice to the company's employees...for
               | free!
        
               | boardwaalk wrote:
               | I don't think that was the assumption here. They were
               | saying that interviewing someone who doesn't want the job
               | isn't actual (useful) work in the sense it can't produce
               | the goal (a good hire).
        
             | andrei_says_ wrote:
             | This is a very interesting take on activism.
        
           | ineedasername wrote:
           | Depends on your perspective. Making an unethical company less
           | productive isn't necessarily unethical in itself.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | crooked-v wrote:
           | That only holds if you assume that "good" ethics must include
           | being nice to everyone all the time.
        
           | mhh__ wrote:
           | "Stern, if this factory ever produces a shell that can
           | actually be fired, I'll be very unhappy."
        
         | muh_gradle wrote:
         | I found this to be inefficient use of my time personally. 30
         | minute interview to go over what's already written on the job
         | description. A 30 minute to 60 minute interview with the
         | manager or some higher up to see if you're the right cultural
         | fit. Only after can you go through the on-site process.
        
         | paxys wrote:
         | Heck I've done it with companies that are (probably) not doing
         | anything wrong ethically, simply because it was their
         | recruiters who hounded me in the first place. If you are that
         | desperate for me to interview despite me telling you I'm not
         | interested, don't then blame me for wasting your time by doing
         | mock interviews with your engineers.
        
         | allisdust wrote:
         | Anecdotal but the secret to success from my personal experience
         | is to: 1) Never stop looking around (okay, may be not when you
         | have less than one year tenure in the current company) 2)
         | Interview when you really can afford to fail the interview and
         | still not care (for example when things are going well in your
         | current company) 3) Treat it like a collaborative session than
         | a actual interview. 4) Don't reject offers for petty reasons
         | like not agreeing with a companies ethics/tools they use/what
         | work they do. It's work and that is why they pay people to do
         | it. So consider all these factors and ask for a higher package
         | and if you really like to work on something else, aim for good
         | work life balance and use that time to do what you want. 5)
         | Shamelessly sell yourself. The 5 mins intro that you provide in
         | each round in a lot of cases can decide how the rest of the
         | round goes.
        
         | leeny wrote:
         | OP here. Yeah... throwaway interviews are a way to do it. The
         | nice thing about interviewing.io is that you don't have to deal
         | with all the recruiter stuff and scheduling and getting in
         | their process in the first place. You just book practice
         | whenever you want it. AND you actually get interview feedback
         | (with specific actionable things you need to work on... way
         | beyond just pass/fail).
        
         | deedubaya wrote:
         | Trolley problem, applied
        
       | jonathankoren wrote:
       | Coding interviews are the easiest interviews. There's very little
       | difference between the problems, and they usually don't need a
       | trick. Just discuss your solution before you start writing the
       | code, and assuming you don't get a jerk or completely blank,
       | you'll be fine. It's the most objective of all the rounds. It's
       | literally just practice. The fact that it's so paint by numbers,
       | is probably one of the reasons why interview coaching focuses on
       | it. Manufacture some demand, and you have a low effort company.
       | 
       | Technical design is a bit harder to prepare for, because it's
       | more about trying pattern match systems you know against the
       | problem presented. Unfortunately, there's not a lot of high level
       | case studies or design discussions.
       | 
       | The ones that are hardest to prepare for, and no doubt has sunk
       | many a candidate are the softer interviews, particularly
       | management interviews and cultural fit interviews. Those are a
       | complete crapshoot. There's probably stock answers to prepare,
       | but the questions are pretty random. If you can figure out how to
       | coach the those in 202X (as opposed to recycling 1965's advice),
       | then you've got something.
        
         | homie wrote:
         | Absolutely agree. I've found that behavioral interviews are
         | harder than technical interviews at this point. If you don't
         | have the set of experiences they're looking for then it's game
         | over.
         | 
         | This can be ameliorated slightly if the interviewer is willing
         | to accept a hypothetical, but this has rarely been the case for
         | me recently.
        
           | jonathankoren wrote:
           | Or if your management philosophy doesn't mesh with theirs.
           | 
           | "Tell me about the last time you had make your team work late
           | for a deadline."
           | 
           | "I don't. It's been my experience as both an IC and a a
           | manager that crunches just burn people out, and you end up
           | getting less quality work out of them. It's much better to
           | communicate early and either adjust deadlines or
           | deliverables."
           | 
           | "What if you can't?"
           | 
           | "Unless there is an external forcing function on the company,
           | everything should be negotiable. Does this happen a lot
           | here?"
           | 
           | "One or twice a year."
           | 
           | "Huh. It's only happened to me once in ten years, and that
           | was due to a multimillion dollar contract deadline. If it
           | happens regularly here, then the company should fire the
           | directors of engineering for gross incompetence. They can't
           | project manage."
           | 
           | Needless to say, I didn't get the job, but at that point, why
           | would I have wanted it?
        
         | Taylor_OD wrote:
         | > Coding interviews are the easiest interviews.
         | 
         | For you. I am a bit over a year into my eng career and coding
         | interviews are far harder than any other type of interview for
         | me. I have a handful of stock behavioral question answers that
         | I can adjust for most non technical interviews. I do minimal
         | prep before hand looking up who I am interviewing with to have
         | a few questions for them and try to find a way to relate to
         | them during the interview.
         | 
         | That is much easier than someone asking me anything from fizz
         | buzz to red black trees.
        
           | jonathankoren wrote:
           | No one asks anyone to implement a red-black tree. There are
           | too many special cases. Just know it exists and what problem
           | it's trying to solve.
           | 
           | Fizz buzz is a hello world problem. That's why it exists.
        
             | Taylor_OD wrote:
             | I'm giving examples of the range of questions that exist.
             | I've been given Fizz Buzz in a real coding interview. I'm
             | sure someone has been asked to implement a red-black tree
             | before.
             | 
             | Replace red-black tree implementation with some other silly
             | overly complex question that isnt related to the actual
             | job.
        
         | djanogo wrote:
         | >Manufacture some demand, and you have a low effort company
         | 
         | What do you mean by that?
        
           | jonathankoren wrote:
           | I've interviewed at four of the five FAANGs, and got offers
           | from three of them, including one of them twice. I've
           | interviewed at I don't know how many startups and midsized
           | companies as well. All the technical interviews are the same.
           | You might get some better interviewers at the bigger
           | companies, but that's more due to practice on their part.
           | They just have interviewed more people overall, and have
           | asked this question enough times they know the common
           | mistakes.
           | 
           | There's this belief that FAANG interviews are somehow harder,
           | and you need to study for months to prepare, and it's not
           | really true. It's the same MO as the test prep business, but
           | with less obvious metrics for success. (You don't get
           | standardized test scores to compare, you just get an offer...
           | eventually. Did the interview prep business help? Who knows?)
           | 
           | The interview prep businesses push the specious idea that
           | FAANGs are tougher, and people believe it. (eg Less than 1%
           | of FAANG applicants get an offer! Well, yeah. Do you know how
           | many people apply? A lot. Do you know how many are nowhere
           | near qualified for the job they're applying for? Probably
           | more than half.) They keep repeating these claims, they end
           | up scaring people into paying for something that's not
           | needed. That's the manufacturing demand part.
           | 
           | The low effort part is that technical interview questions and
           | programming puzzles are a penny for two dozen. You give the
           | question and the solution in maybe three different languages
           | (say, JavaScript, Python, and Java) and you're done. Charge
           | $500 for ten questions, give them a HackerRank link, and
           | you're done. You'll spend more on advertising and paid
           | testimonials than anything else.
           | 
           | The interview prep companies don't focus on the noncoding
           | interviews, because they're harder to find questions for, and
           | harder to grade. When it comes to personal interviews, you
           | have work with each student one on one to help them talk
           | about their experiences most effectively. That's high touch.
           | If you're trying to maximize volume, you don't do that.
        
         | iamricks wrote:
         | I find that for more problems you do need a trick. Once you
         | memorize some of the main algorithms asked, usually the
         | questions are a twist on common algorithms + some trick that is
         | not obvious.
         | 
         | Sure you it can become easy if you "Practice" but everything
         | gets easier the more you do it.
         | 
         | People who pass these either have have IQ or have grit, thats
         | why companies use this to judge canidates, either you spent 500
         | hours on learning it or DS/A just sticks to your head like
         | glue.
        
           | jaimebuelta wrote:
           | the main problem is that you can get caught in an
           | interviewing pet project, so it seems obvious for them, but
           | not for you. Properly done, a code interview could not
           | require clever tricks, but the problem is that it's just too
           | easy to slip into that realm...
        
             | iamricks wrote:
             | That's true, you can get unlucky with interviewers.
        
               | jonathankoren wrote:
               | The quality of the interviewer is one thing that the
               | interviewee can't control. The main interviewer failures
               | are:
               | 
               | 1) Letting the interviewer struggle. By the end of the
               | interview, the candidate should know what the solution
               | looks like, even if they couldn't solve the problem
               | themselves. If you let someone struggle too long, you're
               | failing them. Give feedback early. Point out caveats.
               | Don't have them code up a dumb a solution, and then in
               | the last 10 minutes tell them to redo it with a
               | completely different approach because it's suboptimal.
               | (Im not talking about special cars they can retrofit, or
               | if the original wrong solution was trivial. Use your
               | judgement.) The interviewer understands the nuances of
               | the problem. The candidate probably doesn't. After all,
               | they just heard problem.
               | 
               | 2) DO NOT CONFUSE THEM! This happens by giving the wrong
               | feedback. You might think you're helping someone, but you
               | could be knocking them off their game. If they're going
               | for the optimal solution, and they know the approach,
               | just let them. It's not wrong, I'm fact it's the most
               | correct answer. It's _very_ easy to confuse someone in
               | these timed and stressful situations. Don't don't do it!
               | 
               | 3) If it's a design question, or something else with
               | multiple reasonable answers, then there are multiple
               | correct answers. Make them state their assumptions. Ask
               | how the solution would change if something was different.
               | 
               | Don't expect someone to come in off the street and
               | understand the nuances of your use case and data issues.
               | _You_ didn't understand them until you were confronted
               | with the obstacles either.
        
           | jonathankoren wrote:
           | Binary search
           | 
           | Quicksort
           | 
           | Mergesort
           | 
           | Dijkstra's algorthim
           | 
           | Depth first search
           | 
           | Breadth first search
           | 
           | Doubly linked list
           | 
           | Semaphores and mutexes
           | 
           | Make sure you know the recursive versions of the algorithms,
           | and that's pretty much everything you ever need for a generic
           | coding interview, and you might not even get asked a dynamic
           | programming or a producer-consumer question.
           | 
           | Maybe you need some more specialized data structures for a
           | more specialized role (eg tries[0] and inverted indices, for
           | a search job), but you probably already knew those if you
           | were already doing that job.
           | 
           | There's just not that much to know.
           | 
           | [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trie
        
       | kache_ wrote:
       | I actually made some friends over discord who ran mocks with me.
       | Being a person who spent most of university partying rather than
       | hanging out with the studious people, I didn't have much friends
       | who had the same programming skill as I was.
       | 
       | Just look around, I'm sure you can find people with similar skill
       | to run mocks with you (without having to go through some paid
       | service that most likely employs desperate people ergo less
       | qualified people). Plus, running the interviews yourself could be
       | more valuable than going through one.
        
         | leeny wrote:
         | OP here. Our interviewers are all senior engineers from FAANG
         | and FAANG-adjacent companies. Average is 8 years of experience.
         | They've also all conducted at least 20 interviews on behalf of
         | their employer.
         | 
         | They're not desperate... they're doing this because they 1) get
         | paid and 2) enjoy helping people get better at this stuff.
         | 
         | Happy to set you up with an account so you can get a feel for
         | the quality.
        
           | kache_ wrote:
           | Have you tried to flip the script and allow people training
           | for interviewing to interview master interviewees? So they
           | can see what success looks like?
        
           | dundarious wrote:
           | Given the widespread (and not unreasonable) belief that
           | FAANG-style interview processes function as more of a
           | quantity filter (quite arbitrarily reduce the candidate pool
           | down to a size that human hiring teams can deal with) rather
           | than a quality filter (find ideal workers), it's quite
           | humorous to see the same people running those ineffective
           | interviews profiting off of making them a worse quantity
           | filter. If you squint at it, you can see this is
           | graft/corruption but legalized through layers of indirection
           | (a classic practice in the US).
        
           | Wagthesam wrote:
           | I'm senior at a large bay area tech co. I used this service a
           | few years ago and actually got great feedback and tips (11
           | offers during that search, almost 100% offer rate for
           | onsite). I'm also on the recorded interviews list
           | 
           | One of my interviewer (from ms) actually had too high a bar
           | and was good to see an upper bound for coding interviews
           | 
           | Highly recommend this service
        
       | lkxijlewlf wrote:
       | You know hiring is fucked when entire industries spring up around
       | the process.
        
         | lrem wrote:
         | A local company here is offering an insurance whose whole point
         | is to handle the claims with your real insurance. I wish they
         | were joking.
        
       | drekipus wrote:
       | I don't get why everyone seems so hung up on the interview.
       | 
       | Relax, talk about yourself, talk about what you've done.
       | 
       | I think doing things like this and from the thousands of Reddit
       | posts about "the dreaded interview problem" only leads people to
       | over think it and have worse anxiety and performance, not better.
       | 
       | The interview to my first job was just listening to my then-boss
       | talk about the company for 30 minutes, the second was
       | stonewalling while my boss grilled me to make sure I know what I
       | said I know.
       | 
       | You're not going to be able to "train" for that just like you
       | can't "train" for getting rejected for dating, you just have to
       | learn social interactions and go do it a couple of times.
       | 
       | ----
       | 
       | I did just remember my worst interview experience, where, after
       | being jobless for a number of years (early on, mind. I'm still
       | young) I applied for phone IT support. - the interviewers asked
       | me to:
       | 
       | "describe the best vacation you had"
       | 
       | "I haven't really been on a vacation" (I haven't been working,
       | poor family, etc)
       | 
       | "Ok describe the vacation you would like to have"
       | 
       | "... I literally don't want a vacation.. I am looking to find
       | work." (Jobless.for.years. every day has been a mediocre vacation
       | up until this point.)
       | 
       | "..... Ok just tell us a story about a vacation"
       | 
       | "....... Ok I suppose I'll go to Rome then? And uh... " _Draws
       | blanks_
       | 
       | You can't be prepared for interviews where the interviewers are
       | shit, nor if they blindside you with questions like that.
       | 
       | You also might lose your ability to detect bullshit if you try.
        
         | jrjarrett wrote:
         | > I don't get why everyone seems so hung up on the interview.
         | 
         | Because if you need a job, the wild asymmetry between you and
         | the interviewers.
         | 
         | You have to be ON for that short time and ready to deal with
         | questions like what you got about "best vacation" or in the
         | next question code a red-green tree implementation, followed
         | seconds later by describing a full scale cloud architecture.
         | 
         | All of that in an hour.
         | 
         | And if you falter anywhere along the line, they reject you and
         | you worry about how you will feed and clothe yourself and your
         | family.
        
         | Kranar wrote:
         | If the company you're interviewing for is just some boss
         | rambling about his wife, then sure, don't bother training for
         | it or doing everything you can to increase your chances of
         | success.
         | 
         | If the company you're interviewing for is among the highest
         | paying companies in the world, where you can literally change
         | the quality of your life and your family's life by making
         | enough money to comfortably retire as a multimillionaire by the
         | time you're 35-40... then investing months doing the dreaded
         | leetcode grind, mock interviews, and doing everything in your
         | power to prepare for it is absolutely worth it.
         | 
         | In fact, seeing just how few people are willing to actually
         | invest time and effort into excelling at an interview process
         | that can tangibly improve ones life in ways very few other
         | professional careers can is even more of a reason to do it.
         | Every time I see people who are dismissive of technical
         | questions, rant about how it's unfair that interviewers expect
         | them to understand fundamental data structures, algorithms,
         | time complexity, and think that all they should need to know to
         | be a developer is how to glue a few APIs together, it makes me
         | both sad to see how low of a standard we hold ourselves to, but
         | also in a selfish way it makes me happy knowing that the
         | competition for competent developers is so low.
        
       | DeWilde wrote:
       | Applied for their site a while back, but was put on hold because
       | there were too many applicants. Have yet to get a response from
       | them. Meanwhile got the job I was looking for, without any mock
       | interview sites.
        
       | Taylor_OD wrote:
       | I signed up for a dedicated coaching program with interviewing.io
       | and ended up getting a refund because I didnt think they were
       | actually very good at coaching.
       | 
       | The platform seems like its mostly useful for people who are
       | already good at technical interviews, or at least good at solving
       | technical problems, and just need practice writing code in front
       | of other people or in a live setting.
       | 
       | Has anyone used interviewing.io with good/great results?
        
         | paxys wrote:
         | I don't see the word "coaching" anywhere on interviewing.io.
         | Mock interviews are usually done at the last stage when you
         | have already done the rest of the prep work. I haven't used
         | this platform but did get friends to help me with them and they
         | were immensely helpful. You can have all the technical
         | knowledge in the world but end up crumbling under the pressure
         | of a live interview setting. If you are unfamiliar with the
         | material in the first place then mock interviews are pointless.
        
           | Taylor_OD wrote:
           | They have a dedicated coaching program (https://start.intervi
           | ewing.io/dashboard/interviewee/dedicate... - not sure if that
           | link works unless you are logged in) which is what my
           | critique was of. The FAQ says if you can write a loop that
           | returns some data then it's worth signing up for dedicated
           | coaching for FAANG companies. I found that claim not to be
           | true.
        
           | travisjungroth wrote:
           | Maybe it's only after log-in. They sell coaching packages.
           | Weirdly, the FAQ is a Google Doc.
           | 
           | https://docs.google.com/document/d/1d7mJDPkEykKzSYjj-Wmza-
           | UX...
        
             | Taylor_OD wrote:
             | Yeah. This is what I was talking about. It's $4000 to $3500
             | for 10 mock interviews and there is supposed to be some
             | type of training/coaching build it. But it's basically just
             | 10 mock interviews.
        
               | leeny wrote:
               | Hey Taylor, OP and founder here. I've shared your
               | feedback with our team. The purpose of this program is to
               | go beyond just mock interviews, and it looks like we've
               | not done a good job here. I'm glad you got a refund
               | already, but if have more feedback you can share, please
               | email me at aline@interviewing.io
        
               | Taylor_OD wrote:
               | Sure. I'll forward along my conversations with Shamiya
               | and Lauren. They were fine during my interactions with
               | them but it didnt seem like they had much ability to do
               | anything other than just match me with another mentor.
               | 
               | After 3 unsuccessful/unfruitful coach matches I asked for
               | the refund.
        
         | strikelaserclaw wrote:
         | i did one session of the system design interview, it was a good
         | way to check my interviewing skills and what i needed to
         | improve on. The most effective way to use this service is for
         | yourself to study your ass of first then just use one or two
         | sessions to validate that.
        
         | ineedasername wrote:
         | _at least good at solving technical problems, and just need
         | practice writing code in front of other people or in a live
         | setting._
         | 
         | I think you mean this as a minor criticism, but this seems to
         | be exactly the point of the service. To figure out a way to
         | find people that are _actually_ competent at the work itself,
         | but not in the somewhat uncorrelated skill of public speaking
         | & live coding w/ an audience.
         | 
         | Also a good way of identifying people that haven't gone to top
         | tier elite schools but are just as good or better as those
         | graduates: Recruiters at a FAANG might disregard a graduate
         | from Generic State University w/ 2-3 years of experience under
         | normal conditions, but if you get one that is willing to place
         | a $1024 bet on themselves _and_ then passes the tech interview
         | with flying colors, it 's a much easier sell.
         | 
         | Now, with all that said, after 6 years I'd still really like to
         | know what their long-term outcomes are. What's their typical
         | tenure at that job, where do they land for $job +1, +2, etc.?
        
           | Taylor_OD wrote:
           | I should have been more specific. Has anyone had a good
           | experience with the dedicated coaching program? I know the
           | value of a mock interview. The coaching program didnt see to
           | provide the value that they advertised for me. I wanted to
           | know if I'm unique or if other have had the same experience.
        
         | skullgrid wrote:
         | I did a 10 session package (got it on sale) that focused on
         | (distributed) system design and ML system design. I felt
         | confident in the coding piece, but I didn't have the
         | opportunity to work on large scale systems in my previous role.
         | I believed that I could obtain a sufficient level of knowledge
         | by self-study and practice, but I also have a toddler that
         | takes up a lot of time and energy, so I wanted to be more
         | efficient. I think it was valuable to absorb knowledge from a
         | mentor that has real experience working in my target role. It
         | turned out that was very successful in my real interviews. I
         | think that I would have still done OK had I not done the
         | interviewing.io, but, by my estimate, the return on investment
         | was high, since I received multiple offers and negotiated up.
         | 
         | e: I wanted to add that my mentor and I decided that we would
         | do 4 pure teaching sessions, and then the remainder would be
         | partial mock interviews that would transition over sessions
         | from them doing most of the talking to me doing most of the
         | talking. I found this format to be good for building my own
         | confidence.
        
           | Taylor_OD wrote:
           | That is interesting. Glad to hear it worked well for you.
           | 
           | Having the coach be upfront about some being teaching and
           | some being mock interviews is helpful. The FAQ doesnt really
           | address HOW they are going to coach or help you get better
           | and in my experience it was, "Do a lot of leetcode".
           | 
           | I guess saying, "We will help you with the last 20% of
           | interview prep" or polishing doesnt sounds as good.
        
       | VirusNewbie wrote:
       | I've watched some of the interviews they put up on youtube, but
       | one thing I found lacking was an actual answer of "I would pass
       | you, but maybe 20% of my peers wouldn't" vs. "This is a hard no
       | for me at my current company, but previous companies you have a
       | 50/50 shot".
       | 
       | Instead all the feedback seems like "you did good, but you should
       | work on..."
       | 
       | Regarding the 'pay later' thing, I wonder if the term is too
       | short? Let's say theoretically I sign up, completely and utterly
       | bomb the first mock interview, and decide I need to spend 3
       | months doing hackerrank every weekend. Then I do another one, and
       | i'm doing better, by the time I get the actual job the time
       | period has expired?
        
         | leeny wrote:
         | OP here. You don't pay til you find a job. That's really how it
         | works. It takes as long as it takes.
        
       | RenvoiDeChien wrote:
       | I found Pramp to be useful, if you need practice with LeetCode
       | style questions and explaining yourself to the interviewer, a
       | peer in the same situation. It's free (technically you have to
       | pay after the free interviews count, but being reviewed
       | positively by the other interviewer gives you free interviews, so
       | I've done 10 and still have free ones to spare). The participants
       | skew junior but I still feel it's worthwhile.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-02-09 23:02 UTC)