> the bigger issue is that companies are being stupid by interviewing anyone this way, period.
I don't know about being stupid. I think it's an okay way to evaluate candidates, and as a person who does regularly interview people for engineering positions I see its value (I just get people to code a simple singly linked list with an insert and a find method). It's just unfortunate for a small minority like me that don't do well in situations such as these, particularly with the more difficult and involved problems.
> Just decline the ones that do use algorithm puzzles / whiteboard questions / etc., and include your constraints about how you will be evaluated just as you would include constraints about salary, insurance, job duties, etc.
> ...
> If part of what you want is to be treated with basic dignity and respect while being evaluated during an interview — something incompatible with trivia / hazing style interviews that are ubiquitous in the tech industry — then just own that choice, be proud of it and straightforward. Just politely tell interviewers it does not work for you, accept that you may need to opt out of a lot of interview pipelines, and you’ll find options better suited to you.
The thing is, I can't really do that. I want to move to America, in particular San Francisco, where I have absolutely no network I can reach out to like I do where I currently am. I can't imagine a situation where a company would forego a technical interview in a case like that, despite my work history or GitHub account
Thank you for taking the time to reply mlthoughts2018, I really appreciate it :-)
It’s strange that you admit the interview technique doesn’t work well for people like you, yet you choose yourself to administer a similar technique and see “value” in it.
Why do you think you’re in the minority? Belief that whiteboard coding puzzle evaluations are broken is very widespread. Even many people who do not experience anxiety from the time pressure or “gotcha” nature of these interviews also see them as a scourge of the industry.
San Francisco is a large place with many companies. Better to find the ones that really fit your needs than to compromise yourself by trying to fit into an interview procedure that isn’t right for you.
Plus, since you mention you already have a job, it means you can take your time to filter out companies. No need to rush or apply pressure to yourself to hurry up and meet some interview standards... you can take a longer, careful search before relocating.
That's fair. I recognise that it's quite hypocritical of me, but I don't really have a choice in the matter. :-( I've argued enough against the practice to reduce the problem from something that would take on average an hour to something that only takes 5-10 minutes at most, something that is taught and used extensively at universities around here. Thinking about it, no one has failed it at all.
For me, I do kind of need to rush. I'm transgender and not really in a safe environment to come out, and the time is fast approaching where it's near impossible to hide. Whereas overseas, where I do not know anybody, I can be myself. That is also why I also want to move to San Francisco in particular, it is very open and friendly.
I wouldn't call San Francisco open and friendly. Hacker News frequently has articles showing exactly the opposite.
Here, just 4 days ago, is an article about the city abusively forcing a person to build an undesirable house because a hostile neighbor wanted to cause trouble:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18695241
We've seen articles about violence too, for example in BART stations and against tech company buses.
I appreciate the challenge of your situation and hope you are able to address the many simultaneous constraints you’re trying to satisfy. I submit that Hacker News may not be the right forum to handle the particular combination of details relevant for you, and indeed anonymous online forums in general might not be the best option. If you can consider other methods of seeking career guidance and assistance, it may offer better information for you.
> Practice. Basically exposure therapy for interviews.
That's the thing though. I have and I do already do that. I like doing coding challenges, some time constrained others not, in my spare time. The difference is that I do not need to succeed in those. There is no person watching over me and everything I do, there is no environmental pressure other than the time. And if I fail, I learn from it and have the ability to try again.
I do currently see a therapist to deal with things, not sure if it's CBT or not. But what I'm told to do is to try and bring myself back into the present, which I can't really do during the middle of an interview.
Doing coding challenges doesn't count. It doesn't include the part your afraid of. They have to be real interviews. Maybe line up a bunch of interviews for companies you don't actually want to work for, and try that in your spare time?
On the CBT side you need to be aware of the various cognitive distortions that feed anxiety [0], and be critical of negative thought patterns. Critical in the sense of what they do to you, and which ones are cognitive distortions. Maybe sit down with a journal after the next interview and try to record lots of details about how you were feeling, and how your feelings made you think certain thoughts, and how it makes your body feel and how it's all related.
Let me do an example. You start the interview and you're asked a question, and you're brain freezes up. You start thinking, "oh no, it's happening again! It's already over, I know how this plays out. What are they thinking about me right now, just standing here doing nothing. I'm not going to get this job!" You can attack a lot of those thoughts. These are all distorted thoughts.
First say it's just an interview. You can try again another time. It's not the end of the world.
This happens to other people. I'm not the only one who has this problem in interviews!
They are probably thinking "oh she's taking their time trying to think the problem though. I know how they feel, I've been in their shoes before too. This is a lot of pressure." Most people are understanding and empathic, pretend that you are the interview, what would you be thinking?
You can even be honest with them! Tell them that you get a little psyched out doing technically problems and make a little joke about it, that it might take you a second to get ramped up. I've done this on plenty of interviews. It really helps defuse the anxiety for everyone! Let me tell you right now that as an interviewer whose interviewed dozens of people I spend a ton of time worried about what I'm going to say or ask next. They won't even be super focused on you the whole time.
Some of the physical sensations could be heart racing, sweating, thirst, etc etc. Acknowledge them and do some breathing to slow down a bit, and come back to the present.
Think of your interview more as a stepping stone. A learning experience. It's not black or white. I get the job or I don't. It's a process. Care a little bit less of how they see you.
In regards to a therapist, it took me 6-7 tries to get one that knew CBT and could help me. I'm not saying stop seeing your therapist or anything, just telling you my experience. And finding a therapist that can actually help and is trained in CBT and exposure therapy was very difficult for me.
The good news is you can do it yourself if you learn how to, but it's very hard to observe yourself and put in the work to basically be your own therapist.
Reading your comment again, I see some distortions:
> "I do not need to succeed in those."
You don't NEED to succeed. Most people go on many interview to find a job!
> "There is no person watching over me and everything I do"
Like I've said the interview isn't going to be watching everything you do. I can tell you from experience that a lot of your interviewers are bored and thinking of other things. You're not under a microscope.
> "And if I fail, I learn from it and have the ability to try again."
Makes no difference to postgres. The one and only difference is that you can limit the length of a varchar when you define the column but that aside the storage mechanism is the one I quoted above for both, and for char as well:
> There is no performance difference among these three types (nb: varchar, char and text), apart from increased storage space when using the blank-padded type, and a few extra CPU cycles to check the length when storing into a length-constrained column. While character(n) has performance advantages in some other database systems, there is no such advantage in PostgreSQL; in fact character(n) is usually the slowest of the three because of its additional storage costs. In most situations text or character varying should be used instead.
And for applications which introspect the schema and display different field types depending on the column type, well you may not want a textarea for a name field.
You're a wonderful person :-) As an international resident, trying to get a job there has proven quite difficult whereas here (Sydney) it is easy. Although I do completely understand why recruiters are hesitant to employ people that reside out of area.
I started an SSRI a couple of months ago to help treat major depression and anxiety. My GP went over all of the side effects and potential health risks, timelines, as well as its severe withdrawal symptoms and that if I wanted to stop I should slowly wean off it by lowering the dosage (cutting the pills in half for a while, then quarters, etc). This was in Sydney, so some at least do it :-)
If you can find access to a psychedelic like LSD/mushrooms, it is more likely a far more effective treatment for anxiety & depression than any SSRI's available.
Microdoses can be very effective and a regimen only needs to last a handful of doses and stopping would have very little side effects. As long as authenticity of the substance can be proven, generally psychedelics are very safe, especially at microdose levels.
A little googling for psychedelic + depression will provide data. A couple of research/articles below.
"If you can find access to a psychedelic like LSD/mushrooms, it is more likely a far more effective treatment for anxiety & depression than any SSRI's available."
That's a horribly irresponsible thing to say.
Even though psychedelics look like a promising therapeutic regimen to some people, they should be administered in a therapeutic setting with the supervision of a psychiatrist or therapist, in the least.
Given depression patients have limited energy to do anything, the energy reserves would be far better spent in finding a good therapist rather than sourcing illegal substances.
"As long as authenticity of the substance can be proven, generally psychedelics are very safe, especially at microdose levels."
Please stop.
The most important thing a depressed person needs to do, is to find the professionals with whom they can begin the healing process. Finding a good psychiatrist and a cognitive behaviorial psychotherapist would be my first prirorities.
I'm not denying your claims. But most western societies have primary care pathways to deal with depression in a competent and effective way.
This is not a 100% guarantee, like you could give in a trivial medical matter. Mental illnesses can be really difficult - hence you will always find individuals from whom nothing works. But lot of people get help through the "official" methods - hence that should the first strategy for anyone suffering from depression.
Please don’t pretend to be an expert in something like this. These things can be life threatening and you are suggesting using speculative treatments that may or may not work.
> So it's pretty clear that male and female brains do not react the same way to these things.
Give the man suffering low testosterone some oestrogen and progesterone, and their mood will lift and vice-versa. Low hormone levels result in depressive symptoms, not what type they are.
> Don’t trans people take the hormones associated with the opposite sex to become more like that sex?
This is correct. Although there's only so much they can do for those of us transitioning post-puberty (like me) once bones have fused and stopped growing.
As testosterone is stronger than oestrogen, it will override the oestrogen in your body and bring about masculinising changes such as making your adams apple more prominent changing your voice box, a V-shaped upper body, facial structure, body hair, hand and feet size, larger bones, and higher hip growth. Whereas if you only have oestrogen, these effects don't occur at all - really only just wider hip growth.
I don't know about being stupid. I think it's an okay way to evaluate candidates, and as a person who does regularly interview people for engineering positions I see its value (I just get people to code a simple singly linked list with an insert and a find method). It's just unfortunate for a small minority like me that don't do well in situations such as these, particularly with the more difficult and involved problems.
> Just decline the ones that do use algorithm puzzles / whiteboard questions / etc., and include your constraints about how you will be evaluated just as you would include constraints about salary, insurance, job duties, etc.
> ...
> If part of what you want is to be treated with basic dignity and respect while being evaluated during an interview — something incompatible with trivia / hazing style interviews that are ubiquitous in the tech industry — then just own that choice, be proud of it and straightforward. Just politely tell interviewers it does not work for you, accept that you may need to opt out of a lot of interview pipelines, and you’ll find options better suited to you.
The thing is, I can't really do that. I want to move to America, in particular San Francisco, where I have absolutely no network I can reach out to like I do where I currently am. I can't imagine a situation where a company would forego a technical interview in a case like that, despite my work history or GitHub account
Thank you for taking the time to reply mlthoughts2018, I really appreciate it :-)