I have taken to only reading your columns on this site because you are consistently thoughtful, and you are, without question, the best writer. Your outrage at how we are compulsively, unerringly, and predictably dehumanized, and your persistence in addressing in day in and day out, is commendable. I am tired. I know…

The pitfall with that is landing a job you may not like or be fully qualified for. If you’re taking the job just to pay the bills and plan to move on, then it’s your life. But if you’re looking within your field, then interviewing really is a two-way street.

This is exactly why I use it. If you want to get paid then this is the dead simplest.

Actually, Google Wallet transfers directly from debit card to payee. No “money holding”

Any answer that directs the interviewer into a follow-up question is the way to go. When I was first placed in charge of hiring, the thing that shocked me the most was how TERRIBLE people were at answering the question I was asking. I'd say, "Tell me about your work history over the past 3 years. What have you been up…

Agonising corporate bullshit. I pity anyone who has been interviewed in this way. Come join the creative industries.

I've taken an oath to stand up and walk out if an interviewer asks a dick question like these. They are designed in bad faith and asked in bad faith. "Have you read enough literature on interviewing to have a prepared canned response to idiots?" is a rephrasing of what the interviewer gets out of it.

"The hiring manager doesn't need you to walk him through your resume chronologically—he can read what's on the page, after all."

Honestly, the suggested answer for two sounds about as BS-y as the 'sometimes I work too hard' answer.

Is it just me or are these kind of questions just lazy and inefficient? Let me explain:

If you are capable of giving these answers, you wont be applying for a job where they waste your time with such BS questions.