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

Tech Interview Handbook

techinterviewhandbook.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 132 posts

Re: Tech Interview Handbook

#51

Post by freyr »

dzonga wrote: post #38

this is the cancer in our industry. seems interviewing is geared towards whatever mega tech companies. yet this on hacker-news. a place filled with seed-stage companies, and early series * who probably just want someone who can get shit done. anecdote: honestly, I have had more problems regarding visa status more than anything, in picking up jobs.

The worst interviews I’ve ever experienced, hands down, were from startups. They asked the most ridiculous whiteboard problems, and that generally just identifies the candidates who crammed most the leetcode.

The mega tech companies interviews, by comparison, were surprisingly more reasonable.

The startups have probably adopted this approach because it’s all they know, but nobody is forcing them to.

Re: Tech Interview Handbook

#52

Post by Aeolun »

qntty wrote: post #39
someelephant wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except for all those stories of people who have been interviewing for months but can't seem to land anything. Much better to realize you have developed some behavioral problems and seek treatment for them while you are employed rather than after you leave your job.

What kind of behavioral problems are you referring to?

The inability to listen to people judge you for not knowing the answer to arbitrary and contrived problems?

I’ve been a valuable professional for years, and then this little snot tells me I don’t qualify for his position because I don’t know what happens when you sum two arrays in Javascript? Fuck off.

Re: Tech Interview Handbook

#53

Post by qweqwweqwe-90i »

slumpt_ wrote: post #46
qweqwweqwe-90i wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't want to work with someone that doesn't have their fundamentals down. Most people spend at least 4 years studying CS, they should know their stuff.

Fortunately for all the productive engineers out there, solving leetcode reflects absolutely nothing about how much they know their fundamentals or “stuff.”

You'd be surprised.

Re: Tech Interview Handbook

#54

Post by Aeolun »

smnscu wrote: post #12
sto_hristo wrote: post #4

These interviews are becoming their own profession.

I've been an interviewer with Karat for 2.5yrs, it's genuinely great. https://karat.com/ I know you made the statement in jest, but trying to improve on the interview process is not a bad idea. At the very least, it's less engineering time wasted conducting interviews.

I don’t think I like karat interviews any more than any of the other coding interviews I get.

If anything, I guess I like the leetcode ones without an interviewer better since at least you’re judged by a completely impartial system.

Re: Tech Interview Handbook

#55

Post by taurath »

My comment is going to come across as mostly a nit - I'm definitely the target audience here as I'm just coming off of a short break and diving into interviews. I'll update my post with more thoughts as I go through it, as I'm sure it'll be a decent resource to brush up on my DS&A.

There's kind of a focus on education here in the "skills section" that I don't find to be true after a certain level of experience.

> "Must have" — Typically, most of the must-haves include a degree (or not) in a relevant technical field, some years (or not) of experience in a particular programming language or technology

I'm not sure I agree with any of this - there are some domains like say embedded where having no C experience is an absolute must have, but to my knowledge almost nobody is thrown out of a pile for not using the specific key language a company is using, like say C# vs Java vs Cpp. Of course there's some red flags as in if you're doing modern frontend work and the resume only notes PHP4.

Also I have always treated degree requirements as optional, unless the role focuses in a specific area of research rather than general SWE. All of my positions in my career have required a degree which I don't have and I don't feel held back by it at this point. IMO at least, accomplishments > YoE > degree is much better outside of entry level.

Re: Tech Interview Handbook

#56

Post by msbarnett »

Graffur wrote: post #25
nosequel wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I never put my GPA on any resume. I had a garbage GPA because the only classes I went to were CS classes so I got horrible grades in all my required electives. I was worried someone would ask and no one did.

Did you not have to submit transcripts of your results?

At no point in my career, even fresh out of school, has anyone asked me for this.

Re: Tech Interview Handbook

#57

Post by taurath »

qweqwweqwe-90i wrote: post #44
ilrwbwrkhv wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is such a strange optimization. As an industry we should boycott leetcode style questions.

I wouldn't want to work with someone that doesn't have their fundamentals down. Most people spend at least 4 years studying CS, they should know their stuff.

You'd probably be surprised how many people you've worked with who are quite competent if not really great at what they do and have gaping holes in what you might consider fundamentals.

Re: Tech Interview Handbook

#58

Post by Aeolun »

ZephyrBlu wrote: post #41
makmanalp wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Of course this has nothing to do with what system design questions (most) interviewers care about. But this is the system design that matters on the job. Sigh. I just think it's so absurd that "system design" is now an interview category that's expected of new grads. I'm talking about the fanciful form of this, where the bright eyed and bushy tailed new grad is somehow working on a problem that is the equivalent of…

> Or they read a prep bible that told them this is how Google does things. Or they read an actual book about a subject (a bit better) but didn't really absorb the ideas (which is fine! happens to me too!), but wanted to use the thing they learned about anyway. In my experience and from what I have heard from other people, this is just how people generally are. It seems rare that people consider things rather than reg…

I mean, I have 10 years of experience in the field and when someone asks me that in an interview I still go like ‘duuuh?’. They’re like asking me to package up 10 years of experience into a 3 sentence package.

How many ways are there to tell you that a caching mechanism is better for a site that barely ever changes than using database replication (yes, answering that question probably gave me some form of trauma).

I do a lot of stuff intuitively, and don’t consider the exact reasons behind them every single time.

It’s like when my maths teacher asks me to write out the steps to arrive at the solution. “But the answer is 30, right?”, “Yes, but I need to see how you arrive at that solution.”, “I look at the problem. The answer is obvious.”

Do I really need to stop and unwind the steps my mind takes to arrive there.

I’m not in school anymore, and I don’t have to graduate any more, so my patience for that kind of shit has gone down correspondingly.

Re: Tech Interview Handbook

#59

Post by slumpt_ »

qweqwweqwe-90i wrote: post #53
slumpt_ wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fortunately for all the productive engineers out there, solving leetcode reflects absolutely nothing about how much they know their fundamentals or “stuff.”

You'd be surprised.

Fifteen years of industry experience and a top uni Master’s and I can assure you leetcode doesn’t predict anything reliably.

It predicts how much time they spent solving leetcode, and biases towards recent graduates. If you’re hiring senior talent it’s mostly a wash and a waste of time. But it’s deep in valley culture so we’ll likely waste our time with it for another decade or so before we wise up.

Re: Tech Interview Handbook

#60

Post by ecshafer »

zerkten wrote: post #29
ecshafer wrote: post #19

I disagree with this resume advice actually. He for example removes that he was in the military sniper team and won best shot, but keeps high school education? I would totally say the opposite, keep the cool the side thing that's a conversation starter, but remove irrelevant educational experience. Including the number of stars on the github projects they worked on seems so.... narcissistic? Promotional? Idk but its…

I would modify the cool side thing (being a sniper), if it highlights leadership skills, collaboration, and determination. There are many opportunities to develop these and many more in military and other roles before you get a first real job. Depending on whether you took advantage of the opportunity and who you are interviewing with, it can be a strong differentiator and set you onto a quicker path to promotion. Th…

I think a better quantifier than just "X commits to Y project with Z stars" would be something along the lines of "Implemented A, B, C in X project". Stars don't seem very useful.
Post reply on HN