| ▲ | igravious 2 hours ago | ||||||||||||||||||||||
even if you were technically correct why would a company hire someone who demonstrates that they are unable to disagree in such a way that a heated argument does not ensue? i'd say they dodged a bullet. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | mrkeen an hour ago | parent | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
The interviewer's job (I was briefed beforehand) was to make sure I know my concurrency, because they use a lot of it there. I have all the patience and time in the world to discuss my ideas. I had the problems, the solutions, slide decks and a Miro board ready to go. He wanted to shut down discussion at every turn with nonsense like "so you think no banks work at all?". Sure, I can grin and eat shit, or I can say "banks predate your CRUD operations by just a little bit". If he had working knowledge on how to represent mutable money amounts in a distributed environment, he didn't let on. I was all ears. So I pushed back on him, and I'll push back on you: > even if you were technically correct why would a company hire someone... Because I'm technically correct. You're certainly not alone in your appraisal of the situation. The market over here works exactly this way. Correct, reliable systems come a distant second to agreeing with the team. Technical discussions are incredibly likely to devolve into people discussions. No people discussion has ever worked it's way back into being about fixing the broken software. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | tasuki 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Yes they did, and so did mrkeen! | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||