621–630 of 675 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ok but it does tho - all other things being equal and you better believe it they do have other type of interviews not just lc
Ok, tell me what other types of interviews do they do other than system design, leetcode, and behaviorial for engineering?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The average college graduate makes ~60k out of school. The median law school new grad makes ~80k. Yet a large group on Hacker News acts like anyone who studies enough to get into a FAANG company fell for some horrible scam. I've studied less than 200 hours in my life and now make ~320k and expect to get ~450k when I switch jobs later this year (both remote)– I have only a high school diploma. Chalk me up as another v…
Imagine misattributing FAANG comp to any kind of personal competency. My FB interview panel was the biggest clowncar of unwarrantedly self important people. Anyway, pretty orthogonal to your comment, but kind of hilarious seeing what comp can do to people's ego, and perception of self I made it rich through hustle and major contributions to a startup from the early days. Most big tech employees are a cog in the machi…
All of these supposed "flaws" of leetcode are by design. Big companies want people who are smart enough to do the work, but obedient enough to put up with all the bullshit that comes with working at a big company. What person better matches that than someone who's able and willing to study for and pass a tech version of the SAT? Every anti-leetcode article I read is some version of "leetcode is bad because it measure…
On top of that, the only people who can really get rid of leetcode are pretty much sr staff or principle engineers and high level HR people. It also doesn't get you promoted or paid more in most companies to go on a long project to change the interview process. Thus it doesn't get changed.
I estimate that leetcode will probably go away in many big companies in 5-15 years from now as today's sr engineers become the next sr management and founders that actually makes these decisions. Many startups today explicitly do not have leetcode interview loops, while 10 years ago many did have leetcode interview loops. When that generation of startups have their facebook that defines their decade and thus defines the next common interview fad, leetcode will start going away.
It also allows you have any engineer interview pretty much any other engineer, which makes interviews overall easier to do.
This is a tired topic at this point. The mistakes people make are: 1. An interview proces exists to fill a position. It doesn't exist to fairly assess an individual candidate. Candidates would like that. That's not the point. If there are 10 candidates and the employer fills the role successfully, they've achieved their goal even if someone great was filtered out; 2. FizzBuzz came about because many people talked a g…
That's really not how it works in Big Tech. The company is ravenous for anyone and everyone in the world who clears "the bar." Requisitions and headcount quotas are a way of apportioning bar-clearing candidates among teams/EMs, but the company never reaches some state of having filled the open positions and being done with hiring. And as an individual engineer, you're expected to help interview for sister teams (sometimes quite distantly related) so you never do either.
Even when hiring for my own team I have never seen a discussion like "okay we've seen 7 candidates for this role, let's pick the best one." It is always just take it or leave it for each candidate as they come. The goal is to get as many people as possible in the door. Making the interview easier would fit our goals quite well, it's just a social taboo, so instead we do things like cast a wider net and spend more hours interviewing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ok, tell me what other types of interviews do they do other than system design, leetcode, and behaviorial for engineering?
Lol yeah apart from sanitation, the medicine, education, wine and public order what have the romans ever done to us? In your view that’s not enough to make an informed eng hire?
It's much better than the alternative and ideally only one part of the interview process. Ultimately the proof is in the pudding, I've had loads of candidates that could barely code and Leetcode-style problems are a great filter against that. Otherwise you risk just getting PM-style bullshitters as engineers, who talk persuasively about projects that other people actually implemented.
It’s absolutely hilarious you think leetcode would give you the skills to design anything larger than a simple website. I don’t recall leet code ever talking about how to set up an infrastructure that has reliability on an enterprise-level where seconds of downtime means millions of dollars lost. But you’ll be really good at hash maps and quicksort which make for good worker drones, not necessarily good engineers. th…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ok, tell me what other types of interviews do they do other than system design, leetcode, and behaviorial for engineering?
Lol yeah apart from sanitation, the medicine, education, wine and public order what have the romans ever done to us? In your view that’s not enough to make an informed eng hire?
Nothing tells me more about someone that is full of it than simply being dismissive of others. I ask for an example to support your argument, instead you chose to be defensive and give me attitude.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> IQ does not tell determination/hard-working-attitude this is what everyone said a college degree was for. Or experience. Neither of which matter when a senior dev with 10 years of experience and two kids still has to find an hour or two a day for three months in a row to grind out textbook algorithms to fake problems. Just to switch their fucking job. Thanks to cargo-cult insanity, god help those stuck in miserable…
To be fair, most are real problems, just phrased in a contrived way. Yes, they're rarely encountered in most day-to-day jobs. But that doesn't make them fake...
The actual solution for encountering a differential equation at work is wolfram alpha, not getting a pen and paper to apply heuristic knowledge on solving differential equations
Part 1 is a design doc where a problem statement has been outlined with goals and notes from the development team. Your job is to respond to their questions and propose a high level architecture to solve the problem. Part 2 is the coding portion, you're dropped into a codebase that relates to the previous portion and are given a todo list of tasks to complete. It's basically feature implementation, ranging from trivial to somewhat involved.
I really like this approach. As someone who has interviewed a lot of candidates using Leetcode style questions, I would love if my org moved towards this format. Unfortunately, it's pretty hard getting FAANG companies to drastically change hiring practices, but if smaller companies start adopting it maybe it will get some traction.