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

If Richard Feynman applied for a job at Microsoft (2002)

sellsbrothers.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 220 posts

Re: If Richard Feynman applied for a job at Microsoft (2002)

#201

Post by Maanum »

version_five wrote: post #169
mabbo wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The 747 ping pong ball estimation problem is a Fermi problem, where the goal is to get the right order of magnitude of the answer. Sure. But "why are manhole covers round?" is not. It's a stupid "have you ever heard this clever fact" question that's often designed just to figure out if you're clever and/or lucky vs testing actual knowledge and skill. If your aim in interviewing is to fill the team with people who lov…

I worked and interviewed a lot of people in business consulting. We did ask what you call Fermi problems as they are surprisingly representative of the abstract thinking that is required in the job, specifically proposing frameworks for what kind of information we need to either go and get or state as assumptions in order to support a decision. As the GP points out, the questions are testing how you model something y…

This is really good insight and reminds me of similar industry norms that often get strong pushback (e.g. OKRs). Often there is solid reasoning behind why and when you'd want to employ these practices. However, enough organizations implement them just because they've seen them used or because there's hype around them. Eventually the poor implementation attracts pushback, but often the naysayers also don't understand the reasoning behind the practice.

I personally didn't understand what these types of questions would accomplish, but your explanation makes sense and it seems like this would be a good tool in the hiring toolkit.

Re: If Richard Feynman applied for a job at Microsoft (2002)

#202

Post by ineedasername »

BizarroLand wrote: post #128
ineedasername wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hold the barometer up and shout that it's a bomb & you'll blow up the building if someone doesn't tell you how tall it is. Use the barometer to prop open the door to the city's municipal building as the last person leaves for the day & sneak in to find the plans for building.

Dig a hole all the way through the earth and drop the barometer from the top of the building into the hole, and subtract from that time the time it would take the barometer to fall from directly over the hole to the other side and then divide the remainder by 9.8m/s^2.

Strap the barometer to a bomb & drop it on the building. Proceed to argue with the examiner in the rubble over the definition of "building" and whether the tallest piece of debris qualifies.

Re: If Richard Feynman applied for a job at Microsoft (2002)

#203

Post by gorwell »

babelfish wrote: post #183
gorwell wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not to ridicule liberals. I'm a liberal. It's to mock the illiberalism and totalitarianism that is replacing liberalism, and is increasingly flexing its power in our cultural institutions.

How was that relevant to the article?

Because it used an outdated term according to the new rules. Have you missed how many terms are being retired and renamed? git checkout master branch is a well known example here, but that's not a lone example and it'll continue until meeting resistance from its own side.

Re: If Richard Feynman applied for a job at Microsoft (2002)

#204

Post by babelfish »

gorwell wrote: post #203
babelfish wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How was that relevant to the article?

Because it used an outdated term according to the new rules. Have you missed how many terms are being retired and renamed? git checkout master branch is a well known example here, but that's not a lone example and it'll continue until meeting resistance from its own side.

What new rules specifically? Who has ever called for what your comment posted? It seems like you made up something to be mad about that didn’t happen, then commented on a completely unrelated article.

Re: If Richard Feynman applied for a job at Microsoft (2002)

#205

Post by jerf »

jfengel wrote: post #121
jerf wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you, and as such, I suggest simply asking such an estimation problem set in the computing world. It also has the advantage that you can get into discussions of things relevant to computing, like finding out how much they understand about orders of magnitude time like socket communication times to various distances, speeds of disks, etc. One of the reasons I don't like "how many ping pong balls" etc. is t…

I think there's advantages and disadvantages to either approach. In this case, the thing I like about it is having them talk through their reasoning, regardless of the domain. If it's a domain they're familiar with I get the benefit of their knowledge, but it also takes longer because the specificity raises a lot more questions. If it's an unfamiliar domain, I get a glimpse of their creativity with a problem they hav…

These are so cliche that they mean nothing. They're all the same question. Superficially different, but fundamentally three same. There nothing to sink your teeth into, because they're all made up. Asking something with some grounding in reality gives us something to actually chew on.

But hey, ask your silly question about sodium atoms. As for "interviewing you" as well, if you're ever interviewing me and pull one of those out, you better be looking pretty good in the rest of the interview because you just lost a lot of points.

Re: If Richard Feynman applied for a job at Microsoft (2002)

#206

Post by jerf »

zepolen wrote: post #185
jfengel wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there's advantages and disadvantages to either approach. In this case, the thing I like about it is having them talk through their reasoning, regardless of the domain. If it's a domain they're familiar with I get the benefit of their knowledge, but it also takes longer because the specificity raises a lot more questions. If it's an unfamiliar domain, I get a glimpse of their creativity with a problem they hav…

I find it pointless to convince someone who doesn't see the value of thinking about solutions to problems they've never seen before. They will never be pioneers and that's okay, an organization needs both.

If you're implying I don't see value in solving problems I've never seen before, part of my objection is precisely that these "problems" aren't it. They're all the same. You pull 3-5 numbers out of your moderately informed ass and multiply them together. This is not "a problem I've never seen before", it's a problem I've heard a hundred times before. There's no creativity here, it's a dreadfully dull and well-established process.

Re: If Richard Feynman applied for a job at Microsoft (2002)

#207

Post by zepolen »

jerf wrote: post #206
zepolen wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it pointless to convince someone who doesn't see the value of thinking about solutions to problems they've never seen before. They will never be pioneers and that's okay, an organization needs both.

If you're implying I don't see value in solving problems I've never seen before, part of my objection is precisely that these "problems" aren't it. They're all the same. You pull 3-5 numbers out of your moderately informed ass and multiply them together. This is not "a problem I've never seen before", it's a problem I've heard a hundred times before. There's no creativity here, it's a dreadfully dull and well-establi…

They are completely 'it', you just don't understand how, and don't even bother to ask why.

Re: If Richard Feynman applied for a job at Microsoft (2002)

#208

Post by Torock »

gmadsen wrote: post #20
jmgrosen wrote: post #16

One would hope Microsoft wouldn't hire him due to his long history of rampant sexism, but, being realistic, they would not likely care.

ah yes lets tear down any and all great thinkers, so we don't need to compete on a competency basis.

He was a sexist, accusing him of some inane bias isn't going to change the fact that the man was a sexist

Re: If Richard Feynman applied for a job at Microsoft (2002)

#209

Post by specialist »

okareaman wrote: post #75

How many ping pong balls would it take to fill a 747? Why do you ask? What problem are you trying to solve? We want to understand your thought process I'd think it was stupid to fill a 747 with ping pong balls and think about something else

When asked how I'd do some contrived text processing task, I replied "I'd look at the wiki page for grep and futz until something worked." (Today I'd probably start with 'tldr' command.)

Like I've done my entire career. Most of our job is mygyvering crap. Esp for scrubbing data.

"Well, ya, that'd work. And probably what I'd do too."

Next interviewer really grilled me about parsing and spam detection. For a UI job. When I explained some of the grammars I did write, for a hobby project, this "bar raiser" dismissed the effort by saying "well, that's nothing, lex/yacc did all the work." (To my overlasting shame, I sarcastically replied "Ya, and my compiler writes all my code too.")

Next interviewer, the engineering manager, grilled me, repeatedly, about how I'd choose between two options, using his current dilemma as the example. (Because apparently I was interviewing to replace him.) I related my prior experiences, eg satisficing. Not good enough. Try both options? Nope. Take a vote? Naw, that'd be too adversarial. Flip a coin? Oh, please, that's not rational.

I didn't get the job.

Re: If Richard Feynman applied for a job at Microsoft (2002)

#210

Post by EGPRC »

adflux wrote: post #43
jimmaswell wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does anything beat just pressing the buttons in order?

This is essentially the Monty Hall problem. First choice is 1/3d to be correct, if this choice is wrong, then change, because you will now improve your odds to be 1/2

In Monty Hall Game you improve your odds to be 2/3, not 1/2. If you think the staying door wins 1/3 of the time and the switching door 2/3, where is the car located in the 1/6 missing?
Post reply on HN