<story><title>Legendary Apple Engineer Gets Rejected for Genius Bar Job</title><url>http://www.businessinsider.com.au/jk-scheinberg-apple-engineer-rejected-job-apple-store-genius-bar-2016-9</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>asuffield</author><text>(Tedious disclaimer: my opinion only, not speaking for anybody else. I&amp;#x27;m an SRE at Google.)&lt;p&gt;We expect and accept a high false-negative rate. Our interview process is optimised for zero false-positives at the cost of many false-negatives. This is a deliberate choice. So yes, I would expect to see a significant rate of rejections of people who are clearly qualified.&lt;p&gt;The sort of people that we want to hire are likely to come back for another try anyway, and the long-term effect of this process seems to be doing what it was supposed to.</text></item><item><author>aluminussoma</author><text>I have wanted to run an experiment of famous programmers or computer scientists applying to jobs at Google&amp;#x2F;Facebook&amp;#x2F;Etc (under an assumed identity) and seeing if they get rejected. My hypothesis is that there would be several notable rejections.&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, I do not not anyone well enough to conduct this experiment.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>joosters</author><text>I&amp;#x27;ve often heard this, and it seems a poor excuse for a terrible interview process&amp;#x2F;terrible hiring figures. Why do you not try to improve your interview process to lower the false-negative rate? Doing so in an intelligent way need not raise the false-positives rate (unless you somehow believe that the interview process is already perfected by Google...)</text></comment>
<story><title>Legendary Apple Engineer Gets Rejected for Genius Bar Job</title><url>http://www.businessinsider.com.au/jk-scheinberg-apple-engineer-rejected-job-apple-store-genius-bar-2016-9</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>asuffield</author><text>(Tedious disclaimer: my opinion only, not speaking for anybody else. I&amp;#x27;m an SRE at Google.)&lt;p&gt;We expect and accept a high false-negative rate. Our interview process is optimised for zero false-positives at the cost of many false-negatives. This is a deliberate choice. So yes, I would expect to see a significant rate of rejections of people who are clearly qualified.&lt;p&gt;The sort of people that we want to hire are likely to come back for another try anyway, and the long-term effect of this process seems to be doing what it was supposed to.</text></item><item><author>aluminussoma</author><text>I have wanted to run an experiment of famous programmers or computer scientists applying to jobs at Google&amp;#x2F;Facebook&amp;#x2F;Etc (under an assumed identity) and seeing if they get rejected. My hypothesis is that there would be several notable rejections.&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, I do not not anyone well enough to conduct this experiment.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>eridius</author><text>Why are you optimizing for zero false-positives? That&amp;#x27;s what I&amp;#x27;d expect from an early startup, where every employee is critical, not from a large company.</text></comment>