I don't understand the article. LOTS of patting himself on the back and saying how great his approach was ... and almost zero explanation as to how his approach was actually different from any other tech company's.
I swear, I read the article ... but everything he described seemed the same or basically the same as every other employer. Except the "free classes" part: those were cool, but they seemed more like a footnote than the point of the story.
> and almost zero explanation as to how his approach was actually different from any other tech company's.
> Except the "free classes" part: those were cool, ...
Seems like you answered your own question there. As far as I'm aware that practice is pretty much unheard-of, and you're dismissing it pretty casually...
Author here... I think that's one of the two mitigations of the secretary problem. At one end is throughput: move faster to yes/no decisions than the age of the inbound applications. At the other is not losing the pool. An open-door policy works, I think.
I've seen one or two software companies that are explicit about this. If memory serves, Jane Street is one example. These companies explicitly say in their "regret" emails that one can re-apply after six months of the last application.
hungryhobbit · · focus · HN ↗
I swear, I read the article ... but everything he described seemed the same or basically the same as every other employer. Except the "free classes" part: those were cool, but they seemed more like a footnote than the point of the story.
WCSTombs · · focus · HN ↗
> Except the "free classes" part: those were cool, ...
Seems like you answered your own question there. As far as I'm aware that practice is pretty much unheard-of, and you're dismissing it pretty casually...
adityaathalye · · focus · HN ↗
I've seen one or two software companies that are explicit about this. If memory serves, Jane Street is one example. These companies explicitly say in their "regret" emails that one can re-apply after six months of the last application.