[redmaverick]

Why is this so surprising. I am pretty sure this would pass human recruiters and even past devs pretty easily.

If I had to skim through many resumes I would have selected this one for one simple reason.

Worked at 1. Instagram. 2. Zillow. 3. LinkedIn. 4. Microsoft. Graduated from Berkeley with 3.94 GPA.

Each of this is an accomplishment.

Very clickbaity title. I thought the guy just added buzzwords like blockchain, big data, hadoop etc and then suddenly got more offers.

[reaperducer]

Why is this so surprising

It's not surprising. But what it does is illustrate the absurdity of the current hiring system that some companies choose to employ.

Any company that works like this is not a company worth working for. Yes, I include FAANGs in that, too. If a company automates its hiring process to this degree, what makes you think any other part of the company is going to be fair to its employees?

We see this more and more as employees with actual real grievances at major tech firms come forward and tell their stories, which always seem to include "...and then HR blew me off." Sadly, no shit. If they don't know how to hire people, they certainly don't know what to do with them when something goes wrong.

[throwaway2331]

No one knows how to hire.

It's all bullshit, besides "do I believe we can work together?"

I've been on the interviewer/hiring side, and frankly the only thing I looked at were: schools/companies/noteworthy positions.

5 seconds. If the resume was dogshit, I wouldn't know. No one reads em. It's probably all lies any way.

Usually a single 30 min conversation over the phone is enough to decide whether or not someone "fits."

And that's basically just talking shop/getting a simple convo going.

Don't take it too seriously.

[edanm]

> It's not surprising. But what it does is illustrate the absurdity of the current hiring system that some companies choose to employ.

That's a broad statement. It's only absurd if there is a better way to do it that they are not using. And frankly, almost no one knows a better way to hire, which is why almost everyone is doing this. (There are interesting ideas in how to hire better, e.g. `tptacek's and `patio11's old startup, but not sure if there is anything proven, or at scale).

> Any company that works like this is not a company worth working for. Yes, I include FAANGs in that, too. If a company automates its hiring process to this degree, what makes you think any other part of the company is going to be fair to its employees?

Once again a pretty broad statement. Also one that is kind of laughable. FAANGs, for all their other faults, are generally considered some of the best places to work for, in one of the industries that treat its employees best. You're literally talking about places that are better to their employees than 99% of the world experiences, and dismissing them completely. I think your standards are odd.