There is always a shortage of good jobs. You can fight the process all you want, if any job at all will do, and you don't care how long it takes to get it.
> You are often asking accomplished individuals to waste their time on badly compensated job proposals
What do you mean by badly compensated?
Why would you assume someone else knows anything about your accomplishment and credentials and trusts the skills you list on your resume before you've demonstrated anything?
Also, if you're good, then why does a low bar for entry scare or offend you? A screen for basic aptitude is narrowing the field and removing people from competition who can talk well but don't have programming experience. That seems like an advantage for anyone who can pass the easy tests.
They are fun, and they give me a chance to shine. The coding quizzes actually saved me once when I did really badly in another part of the interview. That company hired me, and gave me what others there thought was the good job.
I also administer coding quizzes to people I hire, and I find them a small but useful part of the larger interview process. I'm giving an assembly language coding quiz to someone later today.
> She basically interrupted you from working on something benefiting humanity
That seems a little hyperbolic. Do you want the job? You have to spend time interviewing. Simple as that. Don't do the quizzes if you don't want the job.
> Then you see the same company awarding their good jobs to friends of higher ups
Most companies try to promote from within, and many people think that's a good thing. The alternative is you hire unknowns from outside the company over people who've been there putting in the time and know the system.
> just because she was lazy to check your CV and ignorant of the industry
It's both presumptuous and pessimistic, and also likely wrong, to assume that a coding quiz implies any laziness on anyone's part.
> Imagine the same doing in other areas of industry
Other jobs have it much worse, you have to get bureaucratic certifications for a lot of jobs that are a lot less fun than Hackerrank, and take months and months. Or you could be a lawyer or doctor, and you have to raise money and bring in clients in order to get the good jobs.
What jobs are you thinking of that have it so much better than programmers?
I think you forgot to add the "/s" to this statement.
If their hiring process involves jumping through hoops before being granted permission to interview and if the tasks assigned to you bear almost no relationship to the job at hand, the chances of the job actually being good are low.
Employers that do this kind of thing typically have an entitlement complex and not the smartest. People with an entitlement complex who are not very clever are bad to work for.
>Why would you assume someone else knows anything about your accomplishment and credentials and trusts the skills you list on your resume before you've demonstrated anything?
In my case because I have a bunch of open source available that they can just read.
If a company expects me to complete a 1 hour badly thought through exercise that is at best barely related to the job before they grant me permission to talk to them, just exactly how well do you think they'll treat me once I'm actually hired?
You have just dismissed most tech companies. All the large ones (Google, Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, etc.) give coding puzzles as part of their interview process.
If you don't want to work for one of those companies, that's absolutely your choice, but you'd be wrong to say they have an entitlement complex or aren't the smartest.
> In my case because I have a bunch of open source available that they can just read.
I do read people's OS projects, but I simply can't do that for every candidate before I screen them, I don't have enough time. If the coding tests are easy, and you want me to see your open source project, then just ace the coding test and move on.
If you don't want the job, then don't do the coding test. It is your choice.
"Mimic real life" means no puzzles (unless I've literally experienced them in real life), no binary tree reversals and no big O notation questions.
>You have just dismissed most tech companies. All the large ones (Google, Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, etc.) give coding puzzles as part of their interview process.
I think that type of thinking leads to embarrassments like this:
https://twitter.com/mxcl/status/608682016205344768
I think he experienced exactly the same problem the OP is talking about and in this case it's not him who was dumb, it was Google.
I wouldn't rule out any of those companies but I think I'd rule out joining through the standard interview process - I'd look for specific people who looked to be doing exciting work on specific teams and try to befriend them.
>you'd be wrong to say they have an entitlement complex or aren't the smartest.
I think it would depend upon the team. I think they're not all geniuses, and they do have a tendency to drink their own kool aid. For sure some teams are great though.
They are considered the best and give above average compensation. Is your company considered the best, properly paying top talent, to employ the same schema? Those tests were done to distill the top end performers with the accepted risk of huge number of false negatives. Now every mom-and-dad shop is trying to use it. That's why I call it insanity, getting extreme practices into mainstream in our industry.
It's not a matter of fear or offense. It's a matter of judiciously investing my time on the right opportunities.
I get about 3 to 4 calls from recruiters everyday. If I agree to go through this kind of interviewing process every day (even if the bar is low), I would be spending more than 20 hours every week just doing HackerRank tests. This is not feasible for me. Therefore just like the recruiters need a way to filter candidates out, I need a way to filter recruiters out.
Requesting a HackerRank test is just one of the many filters I use.
I agree completely, I was under the assumption that this entire conversation is about what happens after you (the candidate) submit an initial job application, or respond to a recruiter about a job you're actually interested in.
I'd never do Hackerrank tests in response to recruiter spam.
