Live data from Hacker News

Google tries new angle on hiring

ft.com

11–20 of 69 posts

Re: Google tries new angle on hiring

#11

Too bad they won't ask about manhole covers anymore. I figured that one out on my own a long, long time ago. (free points!) P.S. If you know why they make them round, then do you know why they don't make them triangular? ;)

I'm pretty sure a triangular one can fall down its hole if tilted properly.

Re: Google tries new angle on hiring

#12
post #11

Too bad they won't ask about manhole covers anymore. I figured that one out on my own a long, long time ago. (free points!) P.S. If you know why they make them round, then do you know why they don't make them triangular? ;)

I'm pretty sure a triangular one can fall down its hole if tilted properly.

Oldie http://hebig.org/blog/003029.php

Re: Google tries new angle on hiring

#13
I did > 8 interviews with Google and never encountered anything resembling manhole/ping-pong ball problems; this was more than two years ago and my friends who've interviewed since haven't mentioned them either.

Still, limiting the number of interviews to 5 or so is at the very least a positive step towards reducing the chance of people meeting someone from what steve yegge calls their "interview anti-loop" (see: http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2008/03/get-that-job-at-goog...; short version - sets of interviewers whose favourite subjects/questions happen to not overlap with your particular specialities, and will therefore have a much dimmer view of your talents than differently focused colleagues).

Also, a problem with many many interviews is it's even harder for a candidate who has been given no significant post-rejection feedback to figure out what needed improvement or where you weren't a good fit; I'm reduced to speculating that maybe number 7 was a bit iffy? Or maybe 4 and 7?

Re: Google tries new angle on hiring

#14
When I interviewed some months ago, I had one telephone interview and five on-site interviews. If I understood them correctly, some candidates also go through a second telephone interview. So a maximum of seven if you include phone interviews.

The interviews were quite challenging (and of increasing difficulty), but there was nothing even resembling a trick question or a mind teaser. I researched a bit before the interviews, and credible results consistently said that Google always had a policy against such questions. I wonder how the head of HR can then talk about it as if they were asking such questions recently?

All in all, the hiring process was challenging and exhausting, but never felt unfair or sloppy/undirected.

Re: Google tries new angle on hiring

#15

Too bad they won't ask about manhole covers anymore. I figured that one out on my own a long, long time ago. (free points!) P.S. If you know why they make them round, then do you know why they don't make them triangular? ;)

I googled for the proper spelling of "Reuleaux triangle", and Wikipedia's article has this:

  > Because all diameters are the same length, the Reuleaux triangle,
  > with all other curves of constant width, is an answer to the question
  > "Other than a circle, what shape can you make a manhole cover so that
  > it cannot fall down through the hole?"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reuleaux_triangle

Re: Google tries new angle on hiring

#16
post #9

If I'm perfectly honest, the reason I haven't applied to companies like Google is because their process scares me. I studied at a modest university and achieved a good degree, but the kind of horror stories I hear make me firmly believe that I received a terrible education, because the level of employees they seem to attract (Jon Skeet, anyone?) are a class apart from myself. It didn't help that the university next d…

Don't let them make you feel like that. What matters is what you make and how you interact with people around you.

I've met geniuses who don't make anything interesting out of their lives. They just play mind games and show off. Nobody really likes them or their "high standards." Usually they just criticize everybody and everything in some way or another, instead of helping out. And they are often lazy, covering themselves by stating things are not "challenging" or worthy of their highness.

They remind me of those rich guys with sports cars. They wouldn't win any race. What matters is how you do with what you have. The house of cards of arrogants falls down if enough people just ignore them. Like the typical high school hotness scenario.

My ideal hiring test:

  - What do you code for fun?
  - How do you help people around you?
  - Favorite non-fiction books?
  - Would you like to come over for a hackathon next saturday?
Edit: I know one counter-example within Google, though. YMMV

Re: Google tries new angle on hiring

#18
post #8

"The new approach includes a new “rule of five” that limits the number of interviews a candidate can attend to no more than that number, said Laszlo Bock, head of human resources. In the past, would-be Googlers were often subjected to 12-14 interviews, he added." Wow, they actually consider 5 interviews to be a lean approach to interviewing; no wonder their process is convoluted. Methinks Google seriously needs to re…

Well, depends on how you count. Is 4 one-two hour interviews by different people on the same day considered one interview or four? (Assuming, of course, a preliminary phone interview would constitute the fifth)

Re: Google tries new angle on hiring

#19
post #6

God bless the manhole cover problem. That's been making the rounds for over a decade.

I don't like those problems. IMHO, they encourage rationalizing things that probably just evolved/happened over time. The real answer for me is because no better shape happened or showed to be significantly better. Also, since almost all follow the same shape, it's harder for other shapes to enter the market. Winner takes all.
Post reply on HN