正文翻譯

想知道歪果人面試時更看重什么嗎？想知道如何判斷一個人聰明與否嗎？
看看歪果仁是怎么看待這個問題的吧。

評論翻譯

Dave Perrion-Wischmeyer
That’s an interesting thing to do, Jade. Can you tell us more about it? What experiences gave you the idea of asking job-unrelated stuff? I’m very *curious* to know (pretending to be intelligent here )

這挺有趣的，Jade。你能告訴我們更多關于招聘過程的事情嗎？
是什么經(jīng)歷讓你產(chǎn)生了問與工作無關的東西的想法？
我對此非常好奇，想了解更多（在這里裝作很聰明）。

Mike Bell
Makes absolute sense based on what I’ve seen, except that you’ve taken it to a much deeper level!

根據(jù)我的觀察，你說的絕對有道理，只不過你把它帶到了一個更深的層次!

Bryan King
That’s basically why the only question that’s useful in some interviews is “What do you like to do in your free time”?

這基本上就是為什么在某些些面試中，唯一有用的問題其實是， "你在空閑時間喜歡做什么？"

Sabrina Beach
Thank you! In my opinion that is how interviews should be! I have never understand the point of a standard interview because as you said, it's all just fake rehearsed fluff that shows nothing about what a person is really like or if they're actually a good fit for the job. I don't get how a standard interview allows you to sext the best candidate. Some people might be terrible interviewees (actors really) but fantastic employees and vice versa. I think your method better allows you to see the real qualities of a person.

謝謝你！在我看來，面試就應該是這樣的!?
我從來沒有理解過標準面試的意義，因為正如你所說，這一切都只是在演出一場戲，沒有顯示出一個人真正的樣子，或者他們是否真的適合這份工作。
我不明白標準面試是如何讓你選擇最佳候選人的。但有些人可能真的是可怕的面試者（真的可以演到滴水不漏），而夢幻的員工，反之亦然。
我覺得你的方法更能讓你看到一個人的真實素質(zhì)。

Mohan Menon
…loved it when you said ‘…the mask taken off’. I remember some doyen organizations bringing up a practice of inviting the best performers (after a series of interviews) for a business lunch. The way the aspirant chewed told the interviewers a lot!!!
One can't chew with the mask on, eh…?

......喜歡你說的'......摘下面具。
我記得一些大佬提出了邀請表現(xiàn)最好的人（在一系列面試后）參加商務午餐的做法。
一個有野心有抱負的人的吃相，告訴了面試官很多?。。?。
畢竟，一個人不能戴著面具咀嚼，嗯...？

Matthew Hartman
You get their unfiltered, unrehearsed and unmasked character. There’s a stack full of psychology to be observed here if you’re observant and curious enough to entertain it.
Here’s a question for you, when you hire someone irrespective of their ability to do the job, do you gravitate towards those that you instinctively feel you can get along with on a more personal level?
The answer is yes, you just might not be conscious of it.
The oddest part of this is we keep regurgitating training people to present themselves as they are not naturally, as if this is a faithful mark of professionalism. That tactic was predicated on opinion. It’s one of those opinions that sticks generation to generation and whole entire industries are built on top of it. “Do this, don’t do that”. Empty metrics for the most part.
You’re hiring people. Not machines. If you can’t determine someone’s general character in a 45 minute causal conversation is that really the fault of the person being interviewed?
Sorry, I’m a little passionate about this. I think we need to retool these things a little bit wiser.

通過你說的辦法，你可以得到他們未經(jīng)過濾、未經(jīng)排練、未經(jīng)掩飾的性格。
如果你有足夠的觀察力和好奇心去，這里有滿滿一堆心理學問題可以觀察。
這里有一個問題要問你，當你雇傭一個人時，先不管他的工作能力如何，你是否會傾向于那些，你本能地覺得可以和他在更私人的層面上相處的人？
答案是肯定的，只是你可能沒有意識到這一點。
最奇怪的是，我們一直在反復訓練人們，去掉他們的本色天性，好像這是職業(yè)化的標志。而這種策略是以行業(yè)共識為前提的。這是一種代代相傳的共識，整個行業(yè)都建立在它的基礎上。"做這個，不做那個"。大多數(shù)情況下都是空洞的指標。
你雇傭的是人。而不是機器。如果你不能在45分鐘的對話中確定一個人的一般性格，那真的是被面試者的錯嗎？
對不起，我對這個問題有點激情。我覺得我們需要把這些事情重新調(diào)整得更明智一些。

Matthew Cantrell
You get the benefit of discussing things the interviewee was unlikely to practice. We can all rehearse stuff about company mission statements and job roles, but a sure sign of intelligence is their ability to keep up with off topic discussion.

你這樣做的好處是，對話將涉及到被面試者不太可能在面試前準備的東西。
我們都可以預先準備關于公司使命宣言和工作崗位相關的東西，但高智力的標志之一，是他們是否能跟上離題討論的能力。

Siobhan Kerry
My brother had an interview like that. The boss and him took a stroll around the workplace chatting about anything and everything and not one word about the job. He got the job and started a week later

我弟弟也有過一次這樣的面試。老板和他在工作場所逛了一圈，什么都聊，就是對工作的事情只字不提。
他得到了這份工作，一個星期后就開始上班了。

Colin Birrell
In a company with a, close-knit workforce, it’s often more important that a potential employee is going to fit in with their colleagues. Nobody wants to spend 40+ hours per week with some self-centered, humorless, argumentative so and so, no matter how good they are at their job!

在一個擁有，緊密團結的員工隊伍的公司里，一個潛在的員工是否能融入他們的同事，往往是更重要的。
沒有人愿意每周花40個小時以上的時間和一些以自我為中心、沒有幽默感、愛爭論的人在一起，不管他們在工作上有多好。

Muhammad smith
Yep, how successful a person is within their personal life is an excellent indication of how they’ll perform within a company. I’d leave a company if I didn’t like the personality or character of a person I was working with.

是的，一個人在個人生活中的成功程度，是他們在公司內(nèi)表現(xiàn)的一個很好的指標。
如果我不喜歡和我一起工作的人的個性或性格，我就會離開一家公司。

Joey Vajrabukka
Every answer I’ve come across about “intelligence” is a humbling reminder that humanity has only barely scraped the creative surface of how to imagine ways to identify smartness, let alone measure it.
But I’ve observed that the really smartest of geniuses historically all have 1 ironic quality in common: They all are not afraid of saying “I don’t know”.
The pattern I seem to keep noticing is that REAL genius is driven by an insatiable need to satisfy one’s CURIOSITY, not ego.
I use to sometimes see letters backwards, didn’t start talking until almost 4, reading around 6, so I’m no genius for sure. Maybe another genius can confirm if this pattern I’m observing about genius people is consistent enough to be true.
I would like to share what I personally discovered after becoming a PARENT that could be used to measure GENIUS, or identify a GIFTED child .

我遇到的每一個關于 "聰明 "的答案，都在謙卑地提醒我們，人類對于設想“如何識別一個人是否聰明”的方法，還只是勉強多了點創(chuàng)意而已，更不用說衡量一個人的聰明程度了。
但據(jù)我的觀察，歷史上真正最聰明的天才都有1個看起來非常諷刺的共同點：他們都不怕說 "我不知道"。
我似乎一直注意到的模式是，真正的天才是由滿足自己好奇心的貪婪需求所驅(qū)動的。
我以前有時會倒著看字母，差不多4歲才開始說話，6歲左右才開始閱讀，所以我肯定不是天才。也許有別的天才可以幫助我證實，我觀察到的這種鑒別天才的模式是否具有一致性，以及是否是真實可信的。

Peter Klika
Most extremely bright people are very curious, otherwise they get bored.

大多數(shù)非常聰明的人都有很強的好奇心，否則他們會感到無聊。

Orville Griffiths
As children we were taught the following four truths:?
1. He who knows and knows he knows is a WISE man, you should seek him!?
2. He who knows and knows not he knows is ASLEEP, you should wake him!?
3. He who knows not and knows he knows not is a CHILD, you should teach him!?
4. He who knows not and knows not he knows not is a FOOL, you should shun him!

小時候，我們被灌輸了以下四個道理。
1. 假如一個人知道，而且他知道他知道，這樣的人是個聰明人，你應該和這樣的人做朋友!?
2. 假如一個人知道，卻不知道他知道，這個人是睡著了，你應該叫醒他!?
3. 假如一個人不知道，而且他也知道自己不知道，這個人是幼稚的，你應當教導他!?
4. 假如一個人明明不知道，卻不知道自己不知道，這種人是個傻瓜，你應當避開他!

Nigel Tolley
VOTE him into the highest office and give them all the powers to remain there forever.

把他選入最高職位，并賦予他們一切權力，讓他永遠留在那個職位上。（譯者注：沒看懂，不確定是不是諷刺）

Stephen Fretz
Corollary: how do you recognize a REAL expert?
They’re not afraid of saying “I don’t know.”

推論：如何識別一個真正的專家？
他們不怕說 "我不知道"。

Steve Tsai
I notice this too, when I’m in the dating pool. Intelligent people who have a natural sense of curiosity and a broad range of knowledge are infinitely more interesting to talk to than the stereotypical millennial who spends too much time watching reality TV and following celebrity gossip.

當我在約會時，中我也注意到這一點。
聰明的人有天生的好奇心和廣泛的知識，比起那些花太多時間看真人秀和關注名人八卦的千禧一代，他們的談話無限有趣。

Leather Neck
This is very true. I worked with a man that always said he could gain nothing by telling anyone about himself. He would rather learn from others in conversation and gain via their experience, knowledge and failure. Besides, people love talking about themselves

這是非常正確的。我曾與一個人共事，他總是說，他不能通過向別人講述自己的事情來獲得任何好處。
他寧愿在談話中向別人學習，通過他們的經(jīng)驗、知識和失敗的經(jīng)歷來獲得更多東西。
但是，人們更喜歡談論自己，而非傾聽。

Lore Murdock
People often tell me that I’m smart or ask “how do you KNOW that??…frankly, I’m just a very curious person and so I have asked questions all through my lifetime because I am genuinely interested. Being curious and asking questions expands ones mind much more than one may realize…and yes, you can learn to do that.

人們經(jīng)常說我很聰明，或者問我 "你是怎么知道的？"......
坦率地說，我只是一個非常好奇的人，所以我一生都在問問題，因為我真的很感興趣。
好奇心和問問題給拓展思維能力帶來的好處，遠比我們意識到的要多得多......
是的，你可以學會這樣做。