rnovak

I'm sorry but why do you think you know more about this guys' experience than him? This is like when I'd get calls from a delivery driver telling me I didn't know my own address... Plenty of companies will do custom setups for big clients.

> Software engineers have a NEGATIVE UNEMPLOYMENT RATE.

> land a job within a year of actively seeking

A year lead time is what a negative rate looks like?

Not everyone believes that romantic relationships are "one of the best things about being a human." Just because you believe it, doesn't mean everyone else does, or that you should imply that people are somehow "less than" for feeling otherwise.

As to your other comment, have you considered people who have mental illnesses/disorders? Their lifestyle (in every sense of the word) would not permit a romantic relationship, too bad they can't just "find another one".

The second the interviewer changed the parameters people would start complaining that they were "Setup to fail." These threads commonly illuminate that interviewers simply cannot win, regardless of how genuine they are.

Personally, I don't bother. I went the route of requesting candidates go through a work sample project that I spent a considerable amount of time trying to standardize across all the languages relevant to the role. In the end though, management wasn't for me, and so I ended changing roles for something non-managerial

Okay, give us a generalized example? everyone who (appears) to care about being empathetic while at the same testing for these skills is continually asking for better options.

If you're hiring a point guard, isn't testing their reflexes by tossing them a basketball a reasonable approach?

The point is that solving problems, either by inventing new computer science, or more likely formulating a hybrid of known algorithms requires some semblance of problem solving.

A genuine interviewer (and I realize several/many may not be genuine) is solely trying to figure out if the candidate has these types of reasoning skills.

Let me phrase it this way: By asking a common CS question, you'll get people who simply memorize answers/algorithms. By asking something obscure that is rarely known, you can try to get a glimpse into someone's thought process, which is infinitely more valuable than rote memorization.

What happens when you're asked to solve a problem that hasn't been solved before? By definition something you CANNOT google for

That's what I was looking for as a hiring manager.

> What is the employer putting up? Generally nothing.

Unless you've been in the shoes of a hiring manager, I'm unsure as to where this idea is coming from?

Having been a hiring manager, it is a horrible experience. Unless it's extremely naive, homework sets generally take time to come up with and formalize, and certainly take time to review the results for.

I suppose I can understand conflating the motivations of an interviewer with their employer, but it's not generally true to say that interviewers are just trying to exploit those they interview.

Unless they have a gun to your head, they aren't making you do anything. Applying/Interviewing is your choice.

I'm confused as to why anyone would think facebook's security is good? Their entire profit model is based entirely on sharing information that most people would consider private (and have no clue is being sold to third parties).

Furthermore, however, how would you design a Content Delivery system that was performant that also had the level of security/privacy that you'd consider appropriate? keep in mind that cookie/session based security requires extra network traffic and coordination, whereas a simple GET request is pretty simple.

Considering the massive amount of traffic they deal with (nearly 1B people, right?), I think their use of UUID type strings (though I don't think they're specifically UUIDs) is pretty appropriate.

I guess let me ask it this way: what threat do you feel they've left you open to?

Many people who are actually on the autism spectrum (such as myself, though technically I was diagnosed with Aspergers a long time ago) don't want your help.

I'm continually annoyed that I actually have to say "autism spectrum disorder" to describe MYSELF, lest I be called politically incorrect.

Many just want to live a normal life, and having other people (with no vested interest whatsoever) rushing to our "defense", is quite honestly more condescending than OP's original comment.

Having been on the hiring side of this, I'll note that it does require a bit of start-up cost (i.e. work) on the employer's part, if you want to standardize the process (i.e. to make sure you're giving the same exercise to every candidate, the expectations are clear and consistent, etc).

For example, I set up the project for my team in 7 different languages (Ruby, C, Python, Perl, C++, Java, Go), with the appropriate project structure, etc, for each. This took considerable work on my part, but the end result is that I can judge the output based on whatever the candidate is most comfortable in.

Granted, that's all assuming my skills in each language doesn't completely suck (hopefully).

Do you not use frameworks or anything?

CoC (Convention Over Configuration) solves most of the problem for you, since it's basically CRUD, and that is boilerplate stuff in pretty much any language.

Again, citation? What monitors are you comparing? I honestly hope you're not truly complaining that a 1080p monitor looks less sharp than a 4k or 5k display.

Also, where's your citation/article/anything that you can't get Make without installing XCode?