kearneyandy

I'm a little sad about this. My dad works in computer storage and had access to lots of computers doing nothing. He's now at "just about 11 quintillion flops, 99.12% ranking vs all other users"

I'm honestly just surprised that "secret crush" translates to other languages

My personal experience with this was that Angular 2 was announced, which was completely non backwards compatible. So there were a bunch of people that

1) Needed to rewrite their code

2) Distrusted Angular to be stable

React had a philosophy of small reusable components and incremental upgrade. This is a particularly attractive idea for people experiencing the above. I think this is probably part of the shift in popularity.

"I got all the way to the end, nailed everything perfectly and then never found out why I didn’t get it"

"I saw this repeatedly on jobs that I got all the way to the end point on."

"Total Jobs Where You Got an Onsite Interview: 2"

Interesting points, although I would probably want to see more data before drawing the same conclusions.

Perhaps repeat criminals on Promise are not eligible to use it in the future. All a repeat criminal in this case does is lower the governments trust in the product.

It's pretty incredible how many people rock climb (at Planet Granite in Sunnyvale). People are interested in talking there as well, as opposed to lots of cafes where people are heads down.

Meetup groups for things like Ultimate Frisbee, Spikeball are good too.

5000 / 3,500,000 = 0.00142857142

I think this is a good idea and would speed up interviewing at companies since you would be able to focus on the match. It does rely on companies actually knowing what criteria they are looking for and to be upfront about it, which unfortunately, is not common.

The real problem is that very good candidates are often not motivated to get certs, since they likely don't need them. However with the added benefit of speeding up the interviewer process, I think more people would do it and it could then become a standard and not a negative signal.

Not OP, but I work at refdash

This is a fake feedback report for an interview, to show what companies and candidates can expect.

Thanks for your comment. I do think it's important particularly from a feedback perspective. Since companies don't give feedback, this is one of the first things to attempt to help candidates learn about what is being evaluated and how to improve.

I'm hoping this is a first step to finding out a better way to correlate those things, for now I think that things that help candidates find jobs are a good step :)

The biggest thing is that there is more money in evaluating software engineers. There's higher demand than most other professions, so companies will pay more.

I have limited information about interviews for other industries, but other fields are often not evaluated in the same way. Lawyers do not have a mock trial as part of an interview, so tools for some industries would likely just be a video chat.

Also, as a minor correction this tool is Refdash.

Just for some context about this document, this is a fake interview with fake interview feedback.

It is meant to highlight some of the criteria which Refdash uses to evaluate candidates and how companies and candidates can expect to receive that feedback.

disclaimer: I work for Refdash

The interview data is only ever shown anonymously to companies, even if you apply to a company with it. Only when the candidate and company agree to do an onsite are names revealed.

Basically it's a good chance to practice and get feedback in the worst case, and a way to save some time and get your foot in the door in the best case.

disclaimer: I work for refdash