alt Hacker NewsSure, sure. So now we have the worst of all possible worlds: an expensive interview process where the candidate has to be onsite, and a stupid evaluation mechanism that doesn't at all reflect real-world job requirements. And in exchange for the inconvenience of an in-person interview, the candidate gets treated like a number and is met with a stupid memorization gauntlet that tests a skill that quite literally will never be used again now that we have AI. Sounds great.
Man, there are times when I really hate this industry.
Replies
bdangubic • yesterday at 11:14 PM
> Man, there are times when I really hate this industry.
Or as I'd like to call it - Wednesday :)
> an expensive interview process where the candidate has to be onsite
I'm sorry, but if I'm doing the hiring, the person who isn't willing to come on site to do an interview will be one of the first people off the list to hire (I mean, unless it is a remote job, and the person is nowhere near the employer, obvious exceptions would apply).
In-person interviewing can be extremely valuable. Will it filter out every bad candidate? No, some people excel at faking it. However it can be a big help in finding a good candidate.