Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Hilarious! (Score 1) 180

by circletimessquare (#49800933) Attached to: Chinese Nationals Accused of Taking SATs For Others

that may be the status quo, but the status quo is a failed concept

Q. Other insights from the data you’ve gathered about Google employees?

A. One of the things we’ve seen from all our data crunching is that G.P.A.’s are worthless as a criteria for hiring, and test scores are worthless — no correlation at all except for brand-new college grads, where there’s a slight correlation. Google famously used to ask everyone for a transcript and G.P.A.’s and test scores, but we don’t anymore, unless you’re just a few years out of school. We found that they don’t predict anything.

What’s interesting is the proportion of people without any college education at Google has increased over time as well. So we have teams where you have 14 percent of the team made up of people who’ve never gone to college.

Q. Can you elaborate a bit more on the lack of correlation?

A. After two or three years, your ability to perform at Google is completely unrelated to how you performed when you were in school, because the skills you required in college are very different. You’re also fundamentally a different person. You learn and grow, you think about things differently.

Another reason is that I think academic environments are artificial environments. People who succeed there are sort of finely trained, they’re conditioned to succeed in that environment. One of my own frustrations when I was in college and grad school is that you knew the professor was looking for a specific answer. You could figure that out, but it’s much more interesting to solve problems where there isn’t an obvious answer. You want people who like figuring out stuff where there is no obvious answer.

this is about GPA, not SAT, but they take home is that scores on academic tests are shit, because the "academic environment is an artificial environment". it focuses on skills that don't really help in the job. colleges need to change what they value, because what they value does not adequately prepare people for life


Q. Other insights from the studies you’ve already done?

A. On the hiring side, we found that brainteasers are a complete waste of time. How many golf balls can you fit into an airplane? How many gas stations in Manhattan? A complete waste of time. They don’t predict anything. They serve primarily to make the interviewer feel smart.

Instead, what works well are structured behavioral interviews, where you have a consistent rubric for how you assess people, rather than having each interviewer just make stuff up.

Behavioral interviewing also works — where you’re not giving someone a hypothetical, but you’re starting with a question like, “Give me an example of a time when you solved an analytically difficult problem.” The interesting thing about the behavioral interview is that when you ask somebody to speak to their own experience, and you drill into that, you get two kinds of information. One is you get to see how they actually interacted in a real-world situation, and the valuable “meta” information you get about the candidate is a sense of what they consider to be difficult.

On the leadership side, we’ve found that leadership is a more ambiguous and amorphous set of characteristics than the work we did on the attributes of good management, which are more of a checklist and actionable.

We found that, for leaders, it’s important that people know you are consistent and fair in how you think about making decisions and that there’s an element of predictability. If a leader is consistent, people on their teams experience tremendous freedom, because then they know that within certain parameters, they can do whatever they want. If your manager is all over the place, you’re never going to know what you can do, and you’re going to experience it as very restrictive.

what has google concluded about best hiring practices?

the emphasis should be on behavioral analysis. to glean someone's social intelligence

case closed

Comment: Re:Doesn't get it (Score 1) 244

So why not, instead of teaching these 11 year olds computer programs i.e. clear, concise, logical instructions to machines, we teach them to give clear, concise, logical instructions in general? If an 11 yo has a mind that is wired to program, it's going to be impossible to stop him, if it isn't you'll probably turn him off for life; unless by programing your talking about Logo which the kids would love, but learning a Lisp dialect at that tender age could very likely make learning procedural languages more difficult later in life.

Comment: Re:Hilarious! (Score 1) 180

by circletimessquare (#49800817) Attached to: Chinese Nationals Accused of Taking SATs For Others

you've just condemned the society the person is in, not the person's intelligence or character. indeed, there are people of great intelligence stuck in shitty jobs the world over. only because their society is so shit there is no path for them to improve themselves, through no fault of their own. people of truly exceptional social intelligence then probably quit anyway and start a revolution

Comment: What about severe lag? (Score 2) 53

Florida Hospital Shows Normal Internet Lag Time Won't Affect Remote Robotic Surgeries

So what? It's not normal lag you are worried about. It's severe lag which on the normal internet you cannot guarantee you can eliminate. It's interesting information but I'm not sure if it's really useful information.

Comment: Re:Unclear who this hurts (Score 1) 65

by ScentCone (#49800331) Attached to: Feds Bust a Dark-Web Counterfeit Coupon Kingpin

Bullshit. Unless you can point to real evidence this is true, you're just guessing.

What? How do you think that coupons actually work, anyway?

1) You present a coupon, and you pay less cash at the point of sale than you otherwise would have. This is not a mystery. It's the whole point. If it's the retailer's own coupon, then they are basically putting the item on sale in exchange for having a trackable form of marketing. If it's a manufacturer's coupon, then the retailer is participating in a mechanism wherein the manufacturer and retailer have worked out a back-channel compensation scheme for the retailer having collected less cash during the transaction. This is also not a mystery.

2) When you present the retailer with a bogus retailer coupon, you're getting a discount that's disconnected from one of the key reasons they issued the coupon in the first place: to understand which marketing methods are the most constructive. When you present the retailer with a bogus manufacturer's coupon, one of two things happens: the retailer eats the loss, or the manufacturer does. Again, why are you acting like this is some strange unknown? Or, are you just hoping that someone there's a third magical possibility that makes it just fine to rip off businesses with fake coupons? Yeah, I thought so.

Comment: Re:Unclear who this hurts (Score 1) 65

by ScentCone (#49800287) Attached to: Feds Bust a Dark-Web Counterfeit Coupon Kingpin

Is short, this "informative" post is nothing but a guess.

What you mean is that you have no idea how retail operations and promotional marketing work, but you vaguely want it to be true that ripping off stuff through the use of bogus discount coupons is a "victimless crime" blah blah blah, so you're going to pretend that basic information is unknowable, as moral cover. Hint: you're not as clever as you think you are.

Comment: Re:Asteroid mining is a pipe dream (Score 1) 256

by sjbe (#49799987) Attached to: Neil DeGrasse Tyson Urges America To Challenge China To a Space Race

I wonder about the mindset of people who believe that Americans should be treated and dictated to like the subjects of European monarchy,

That's the most bizarre leap of bad logic I've heard in quite a while. Thanks for a good laugh over something absurd.

what is implicit in your and deGrasse-Tyson's argument that Queen Isabella's investments are comparable to US government spending.

In the sense that they are both government spending that would be correct. Money doesn't actually care if it comes from a monarchy or a democracy. Exploration of the truly unknown doesn't happen from the private sector. The Dutch East India Company did not precede government sponsored exploration. Columbus, Magellen and most every other explorer you've ever heard of was government sponsored. You cannot build a business model around "let's go explore over there where no one has ever been and see if we can find something profitable". No private company could have justified a Moon mission in the 1960s. Anyone who claims otherwise is delusional.

Kiss your keyboard goodbye!