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

A Senior Engineer’s Guide to FAANG Interviews

interviewing.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 195 posts

Re: A Senior Engineer’s Guide to FAANG Interviews

#81

Post by borroka »

kerblang wrote: post #22
codr7 wrote: post #9

I don't know, I've walked into these interviews with zero preparation and succeeded. And I've failed FAANG-ish interviews where no amount of leetcode grinding would have helped me. In my opinion, it's getting rather silly. They're scaring off and filtering out excellent candidates with these excessive processes. None of them even cared about my Github repository that's full of code I write for fun. Software developer…

I tend to put it this way: If you are entrepreneurially/leadership- minded and can develop a talent for identifying talent, you can be 10x, even 100x more valuable than any engineer because you become a force multiplier who recognizes real talent and empowers it - and the best part is that everyone else is dragging their knuckles on the ground and obsessed with pretentious gate-keeping. The opportunity level is wide-…

A talent for identifying talent needs to be supported with numbers and effect sizes.

The relative absence of numbers from the conversation is what allows many directors of football/soccer (those who recommend the purchase or sell of players) to boast about their stature as talent scouts.

Indeed, it is not surprising that directors of soccer focus on successes and tend to gloss over the many blunders made. Which makes it difficult, as in many other fields, to distinguish the role of luck and ability in successes and failures. Almost always, in my experience, those with the most money and at least an average "eye" succeed in doing the best that can be done: everything else is a game of chance.

A more sophisticated and technically oriented person would say that the most that can be done is to increase the odds of success, but then we are all left to the whims of fate: the young soccer player who many thought would be a sure bet will turn out to be one among many, and the average player at age 16 will have the growth spurt in the next two years that will make his body more conducive to stellar success (but was the growth spurt predictable?).

What I can say is that there have been several attempts to create a special agency for the identification and management of talent in the technology industry, but none has turned out to be more than a higher-level contracting firm.

Re: A Senior Engineer’s Guide to FAANG Interviews

#82

Post by codr7 »

xyzelement wrote: post #74
codr7 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And that hits the problem for me; the process often doesn't allow showing what you have to offer, it only allows you to show that you check all boxes in the process.

I don't think that's true -- and I say that as someone who's spent plenty of time on both sides of the proverbial interview desk. Checking the boxes as you say sounds superficial, it's more like - there are some bars to the role you're interviewing for. A typical eng role probably has bars around programming ability, team work and communication ability, problem solving, etc. By "checking the boxes" you probably mean…

No, it's not that general, at all.

Either you say the specific words that are in their script, or highlight the stuff they're really into, or you fail.

Replying here because of wacky thread depth limitations in HN:

Often personal preferences. And there's no discussion, just failure because you didn't say the right thing. Especially if you have more experience than the interviewer. Arguing that someone shouldn't get hired because they didn't check whatever box is something you would never get fired for. My last example was using GET instead of POST for a login endpoint, which is a perfectly fine thing to do.

Re: A Senior Engineer’s Guide to FAANG Interviews

#83

Post by GaryNumanVevo »

jondwillis wrote: post #12

All of the FAANGs are various levels of unethical, or a net negative for society in my estimation. No more interviewing there for me.

Grinding leetcode for a month or two to get a 400k+ TC is definitely worth the effort up front. It's probably the easiest way to earn that much money short of going to medical school or getting your JD.

Re: A Senior Engineer’s Guide to FAANG Interviews

#84

Post by [deleted] »

jondwillis wrote: post #34
ryangs wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Definitely agree with unethical, although net negative seems a lot harder to quantify. Amazon has a lot of bad practices I disagree with, but are they net negative? I find it difficult to assess. And even if they aren't net negative now, is the 10 year trajectory clearly downward? Soloing out Netflix, is there anything particularly wrong with them? I have significant gripes with all the others but no specifics about…

Netflix: exploitative true crime docs and algorithmic recommendations with no way to opt out, auto-play, reality TV.

[deleted]

Re: A Senior Engineer’s Guide to FAANG Interviews

#85

Post by sorokod »

taway234 wrote: post #18
zug_zug wrote: post #15

Just a heads up to anybody super starry-eyed about fang, I worked 10+ years non-fang, and tried fang, and it was absolutely miserable, one of my least favorite jobs of my career. Yes I made a lot, but I also worked and stressed proportionally more. YMMV.

>> Just a heads up to anybody super starry-eyed about fang, I worked 10+ years non-fang, and tried fang, and it was absolutely miserable, one of my least favorite jobs of my career. Most people I know say the same, but they stay. You can be at a non-FAANG and work for half the pay (and often be just as miserable) or you can work at FAANG, own a house, not worry about money, and often do not much work. Misery is part…

On the other hand they don't need to warn away their family and friends from the products they develop so there is that.

Re: A Senior Engineer’s Guide to FAANG Interviews

#86

Post by xyzelement »

hebleb wrote: post #32

Man, I've coded a fair amount in my free time, and have even created a couple of money making side-projects, but I just can't grind leetcode no matter how often I try. That plus the rejection after doing long on-sites drains me for days afterwards. I've come to the conclusion that even though I may be missing out on those top salaries, FAANG just probably isn't for me

I think recognizing that "something isn't for me" (vs is bad) is a great and mature point of view, I deeply respect that. Some thoughts beyond that:

By the time you frame something as "grinding" - it's going to suck. If I were you, I'd ask why does it feel that way? For example, is it because you don't have a good foundation in algorithms fundamentals -- if so, would it help your career to learn those, anyway? Is it because you don't enjoy problem solving or aren't a structured problem solver -- if so, is there something to learn there? Or is it because you framed something that could potentially be fun as an adversarial grind to begin? (BTW, I am not saying any of the above is true or likely - I am just suggesting one "next step" type thing since this question seems interesting to you)

Similarly, being deeply impacted by rejection -- is that a thing that would serve you to evolve over time? As you become more senior and ambitious, you are likely going after harder opportunities and your rejection / fail rate will go up and that's normal and good. Is there room for reframing how you deal with fails?

Re: A Senior Engineer’s Guide to FAANG Interviews

#87

Post by codr7 »

ar_lan wrote: post #59
codr7 wrote: post #9

I don't know, I've walked into these interviews with zero preparation and succeeded. And I've failed FAANG-ish interviews where no amount of leetcode grinding would have helped me. In my opinion, it's getting rather silly. They're scaring off and filtering out excellent candidates with these excessive processes. None of them even cared about my Github repository that's full of code I write for fun. Software developer…

GitHub is not the best metric, though. 1. Many (most) engineers are not in positions to be able to meaningfully contribute to OSS (e.g. all the code I write for work is proprietary). 2. It can easily be faked. 3. Personal projects can sometimes be interesting, but often don't showcase usefulness (unless front-end). 4. Many high quality engineers don't like to spend their free time doing more of their job. Some repos,…

The fact that a candidate loves problem solving / coding so much that they'd do it for fun is a pretty strong signal.

Like I said, it would take more effort from the interviewers to dig into.

But it would also provide more valuable feedback and result in better hires.

Re: A Senior Engineer’s Guide to FAANG Interviews

#88

Post by xyzelement »

codr7 wrote: post #82
xyzelement wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that's true -- and I say that as someone who's spent plenty of time on both sides of the proverbial interview desk. Checking the boxes as you say sounds superficial, it's more like - there are some bars to the role you're interviewing for. A typical eng role probably has bars around programming ability, team work and communication ability, problem solving, etc. By "checking the boxes" you probably mean…

No, it's not that general, at all. Either you say the specific words that are in their script, or highlight the stuff they're really into, or you fail. Replying here because of wacky thread depth limitations in HN: Often personal preferences. And there's no discussion, just failure because you didn't say the right thing. Especially if you have more experience than the interviewer. Arguing that someone shouldn't get h…

Can you give me an example of what you mean?

Re: A Senior Engineer’s Guide to FAANG Interviews

#89

Post by barbariangrunge »

PheonixPharts wrote: post #70
taway234 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> Just a heads up to anybody super starry-eyed about fang, I worked 10+ years non-fang, and tried fang, and it was absolutely miserable, one of my least favorite jobs of my career. Most people I know say the same, but they stay. You can be at a non-FAANG and work for half the pay (and often be just as miserable) or you can work at FAANG, own a house, not worry about money, and often do not much work. Misery is part…

> own a house, not worry about money While you absolutely take a huge pay cut to not work at a FAANG, it's not like making 200k+ is living in poverty. Typically non-FAANG also has other perks: many more fully remote options, typically much more chill about working hours, working with niche tech stacks or on new problem spaces, etc. You can enjoy work and still have a house and not have to worry about money at a non-F…

In Canada, where do you find these non-FAANG 200k+ jobs?

Re: A Senior Engineer’s Guide to FAANG Interviews

#90

Post by dekhn »

mihaitodor wrote: post #78
dekhn wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting. So if I asked you to open up coderpad.io and write a python function to reverse a string, you'd just absolutely refuse? What would you do otherwise to show me that you're a programmer?

I’d refuse, but If the conversation goes in that direction, then I’d probably end the conversation right there, since it’s pretty clear that’s not the kind of role I want to interview for. I managed to accumulate a bit of online presence over the years and I expect my future employer to a) look me up prior to the interview and b) have a direct interest in my Open Source work.

Sure, I'd look you up and scan your github pages. I've dealt with people who set up fake githubs (copying from various places on the web to make it look like they did real work). Can't help you if you only want to interview people who are interested in your open source work... that sounds very limiting.
Post reply on HN