Friday, I had a tech interview, aced it... Well except manual code review...
That had me spiraling. Both good and bad. Who really has the right to...
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
I’m just joking around🤣. I think whether a company hires you depends not only on your skills, but also a lot on how you look, hahaha.🤣
To be honest, after failing many interviews, I do lower my salary expectations. When I can barely get by, I’m okay with taking a job at the same pay or even a pay cut. There’s no shame in it. Staying afloat comes first.💪
Very true, when belts get tight, humbling yourself to take what you can get is the only way to survive. But it's bad when they low-ball you, because they know anything is better than nothing. I mean walk in to a role that has no advertised salary, tell them you earn 22k a year as a senior dev, they'll offer 30k, instead of 80k, because they know it's still an improvement? Not quite fair, but an improvement still improves your financial wellbeing.
As the saying goes, contentment brings lasting happiness.知足者长乐
If you cant be happy with what you have, you wont be happy with what you want.
Where the heart finds peace, there lies my home.
此心安处是吾乡。
Yeah looks are very important, unfortunately :(
no, my salary expectation never drops after a rejection. My last one was not even about code.
The DEV role rejection was about my location, not my skill level. Your sha256 catch point is fair though. One catch in a review does not prove your full range and missing one would not prove the opposite either.
I think interviews sometimes confuse immediate recall with actual ability way too much.
Being able to stare at unfamiliar code under pressure and instantly spot every issue is definitely a skill, but it’s not the same thing as being able to investigate a problem, use the tools available to you, test assumptions, learn what you don’t know, and ultimately build a solid solution. Those are much closer to how development actually works day to day.
And no, I don’t think missing something in an interview should automatically lower someone’s salary expectations. If anything, one weirdly specific exercise is a pretty terrible measurement of someone’s overall value as a developer.
I’d much rather be evaluated on how I approach problems, how I learn, what I’ve actually built, and whether I can deliver something useful.
The question of who sets the bar is the same problem we face with agent evals. A 95% score on a benchmark you wrote yourself is not the same as a 95% score on a benchmark your users wrote. I now maintain two eval sets: one I curate and one built from real production failures. The gap between them tells me where my rubric is wrong. How do you think about the difference between self-assessment and external standards?
User vs author boils down to what matters to you? a user measures their happy and fail paths, vs you would run it more generic, as a system check, rather than isolated edge cases
I haven't been to an interview. But I think my "I will get the job" expectation would drop instead of the salary expectation.
hot take: nobody gets to set the bar on you other than you