Hacker News Reader

Comment by Judgmentality | Hacker News Reader

> That and debate gave me the ability to just start a sentence without knowing where it will end and then talk my way to a conclusion that sounds like it makes sense

You're effectively advocating for more bullshit. The problem is that this works in the first place - we shouldn't be rewarding it.

View on HN

You're right, unfortunately that's what it sounds like I'm saying. It's not really what I meant. The idea I was trying to get across is closer to "being able to communicate what I'm thinking about as I'm thinking about it, and verbalizing that as a coherent sentence rather than just fragments." Ironically, I wish I had communicated that better :)

I’m a person who finds out what I’m thinking as I speak. Iterating towards an idea with confidence in each turn. Even if you end up in the vicinity of where you started, problem not actually solved, you demonstrate how you move through problem space.

Similar to another comment I read comparing interviews to athletic tryouts and competition, which tries to assess how a body moves through physical space.

I'm not sure he's advocating for it, just pointing out that it's true.

> My takeaway, I guess—parents, make your kids do debate!

He's encouraging parents to make their kids learn this skillset. He is absolutely advocating for it.

He's saying "this makes you more likely to win at the game, perhaps you want to teach your kids this skill so they can win." He is not saying "the game is fair."

That is absolutely not the same thing. You have to play the game by the rules, that user is just telling you how to win.

don't hate the player, hate the game. easier to tweak personal actions to address the world as it is than to rant against how the world doesn't work per your ideals. at least this guy is self aware enough to admit there is some amount of bullshit in what he says. I am more concerned with people who refuse to admit this, or worse, genuinely don't believe it.

We can't expect everyone utterance to be rational and logical. We're all just human at the end of the day. We should expect job candidates to try their best to get the job.

Yes we can! We’re computer programmers. Everything can and must be quantified.

What's the point of asking these sorts of questions? Typically to try to get a sense of how somebody thinks and what sort of rapport they have with the interviewer while problem solving, not that they get to the "correct" answer.

I think they have some utility because this is a common occurrence when dealing with clients.

He isn’t advocating it. He is just saying that you must play the system as it is.

I don't know if he is really advocating it, but I absolutely support the notion that programmers should learn to bullshit better.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com