Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google tries new angle on hiring

ft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 69 posts

Re: Google tries new angle on hiring

#41

Post by brown9-2 »

darren_ wrote: post #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: htt…

I have a feeling the spokesperson in the interview is describing interviews for positions other than software engineering. It's been well known that Google doesn't ask brainteaser-type questions for it's SE positions. Positions like Product Manager on the other hand are a different story.

Re: Google tries new angle on hiring

#42

Post by krschultz »

klochner wrote: post #6

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

I had an interviewer who thought he was the only person using the round manhole cover question. When he asked it I instantly answered "so they don't fall in the hole" and he freaked out. "Wow, you are so smart, I've never had anyone answer that question so quickly!"

I didn't have the heart to tell him its a cliche.

Re: Google tries new angle on hiring

#43

Post by alecco »

dtby wrote: post #29
WildUtah wrote: post #3

They've been sending recruiters to me regularly for about six months. I get regular pitches and emails about working for them about twice a month from various people. I'd like to be able to consider it but I'm not in their candidate pool (around forty, no regular job for a few years, non-tech schooling, travel, no high tech work for years before that). Must be hard to reach out to the kind of people Google does like…

I'd like to be able to consider it but I'm not in their candidate pool (around forty, no regular job for a few years, non-tech schooling, travel, no high tech work for years before that). I am not in their candidate pool, either by your standards. Quickly approaching forty, dropped out of 'society' for 5+ years, non-high tech work during that period, no Ivy League degree. And, yet, despite the fact that I have made -…

This is terrible advice. Going through Google HR's meat grinder you have a small probability to get in. The process is quite random and it takes a lot of time and energies from you.

Don't gamble on 1/10. Most likely, you'll feel like crap for nothing. And don't listen to the 1/10ers, they often rationalize and are fooled by selection bias.

Re: Google tries new angle on hiring

#44

Post by krschultz »

eliben wrote: post #11
sliverstorm wrote: post #10

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.

They can't.

First off, there will be a small lip to keep it from falling in flat. This means that the hole is actually smaller than the manhole cover by an inch or more.

Second, no matter how you orient an equilateral triangle with on point facing down the hole, there is an edge across the top that is too big to fall in. The way to visualize this, if you take one edge of an equilateral triangle and sweep it in a circle around one end, it will be outside of the triangle at all points except where the corners meet. So trying to drop it in any position other than with the edges lined up will make it impossible to fall through. And since there is a lip when the edges line up, it can't fall through.

In contrast with a square or rectangle, if you sweep one of the edges it will be inside of the square or rectangle at some points (on a rectangle, you have to use the small sides). This means all you have to do is shove one edge of the cover down the hole and it will fall in.

Re: Google tries new angle on hiring

#45

Post by jakevoytko »

Stormbringer wrote: post #22
bkhl wrote: post #7

I went through 8 interviews (over the course of 8 months) before I got an offer from Google. By the time Google gave me the offer, I already accepted an offer from the other company. I told the HR of Google that their process sucks (of course, I said it indirectly) and she agreed with me. I'm glad to hear that Google is finally making changes here.

Are they still limiting it to only PhDs and Masters? That to me always struck me as their biggest mistake. The common perception from people in the industry is that many of the best programmers are self taught. That doesn't preclude doing a degree of course, however even the really good programmers I've met that did degrees say that they really ramped up their learning efforts after leaving university (and that was m…

I work at Google, and have a BS in CS from The College of New Jersey. So if they ever filtered on graduate degrees or prestigious schools, it's no longer the case. In fact, your description of a self-taught programmer fits me pretty well.

Re: Google tries new angle on hiring

#46

Post by michaelcampbell »

krschultz wrote: post #44
eliben wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

They can't. First off, there will be a small lip to keep it from falling in flat. This means that the hole is actually smaller than the manhole cover by an inch or more. Second, no matter how you orient an equilateral triangle with on point facing down the hole, there is an edge across the top that is too big to fall in. The way to visualize this, if you take one edge of an equilateral triangle and sweep it in a circ…

> First off, there will be a small lip to keep it from falling in flat. This means that the hole is actually smaller than the manhole cover by an inch or more.

Exactly, and with a big enough lip/flange, ANY shape will work.

Re: Google tries new angle on hiring

#48

Post by dtby »

alecco wrote: post #43
dtby wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd like to be able to consider it but I'm not in their candidate pool (around forty, no regular job for a few years, non-tech schooling, travel, no high tech work for years before that). I am not in their candidate pool, either by your standards. Quickly approaching forty, dropped out of 'society' for 5+ years, non-high tech work during that period, no Ivy League degree. And, yet, despite the fact that I have made -…

This is terrible advice. Going through Google HR's meat grinder you have a small probability to get in. The process is quite random and it takes a lot of time and energies from you. Don't gamble on 1/10. Most likely, you'll feel like crap for nothing. And don't listen to the 1/10ers, they often rationalize and are fooled by selection bias.

they often rationalize and are fooled by selection bias. Assuming you are talking about me, that's crazy. I have asked, literally, a handful of times that they never contact me again.

It might be selection bias, but it's not rationalization and it's not fooling me. It's annoying the crap out me. I hope they go bother someone who is interested in working there.

Re: Google tries new angle on hiring

#49

Post by alecco »

dtby wrote: post #48
alecco wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is terrible advice. Going through Google HR's meat grinder you have a small probability to get in. The process is quite random and it takes a lot of time and energies from you. Don't gamble on 1/10. Most likely, you'll feel like crap for nothing. And don't listen to the 1/10ers, they often rationalize and are fooled by selection bias.

they often rationalize and are fooled by selection bias. Assuming you are talking about me, that's crazy. I have asked, literally, a handful of times that they never contact me again. It might be selection bias, but it's not rationalization and it's not fooling me. It's annoying the crap out me. I hope they go bother someone who is interested in working there.

  > Assuming you are talking about me
Er, no. You implied you are not a googler. Perhaps I was talking to you.

Re: Google tries new angle on hiring

#50

Post by bane »

EnderMB wrote: 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…

I'm personally more concerned with the huge time-waste of the interview process, then getting a rejection after all that.

(I'm also concerned about their discriminatory hiring practices -- selecting principally from specific schools rather than looking at individual candidates)

Post reply on HN