71–80 of 181 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I recently started interviewing again and haven't encountered many leetcode style questions this time around. I'm noticing lots of contrived questions that relate to some feature the company had to build.
What does it mean for an interview question to be contrived?
> When interviewing as a software engineer, for example, you’ll run into places that lean heavily on algorithms interviews. And don’t get me wrong, those interviews can be fun (in the same way that Project Euler can be fun), but it’s not very relevant for most jobs I'm curious what changed around 2015-2016 that led to the current interview process. In the before times the interview was more of a technical conversatio…
What changed? Well it was about 2010, The industry became a target for very low quality people to do whatever they could to land the job by faking and lying. All of these annoying interview tricks are just a way to try to filter out all the people (90% of them now) who taught themselves how to talk the talk but couldn’t program themselves out of a wet paper bag. And yes, there are ways to figure it out but it’s reall…
That's called an in-basket test.[1] For a really unusual interview process, see how Jane Street, the trading firm, does it. They expect people to do well at this.[2] Their actual interview process starts each candidate with a stack of poker chips. In each interview, candidates get to make bets on various things that look like financial trades. If they run out of chips, they're out. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> was willing to submit to it for the approval of this company I abstain, myself. I have too much real work that I'd like to push forward to be able justify spending weeks of free time on fake work.
Great! Isn’t that the point? That some people who really don’t want the job won’t invest a bit of their time and people who do really want the job will?
> When interviewing as a software engineer, for example, you’ll run into places that lean heavily on algorithms interviews. And don’t get me wrong, those interviews can be fun (in the same way that Project Euler can be fun), but it’s not very relevant for most jobs I'm curious what changed around 2015-2016 that led to the current interview process. In the before times the interview was more of a technical conversatio…
What changed? Well it was about 2010, The industry became a target for very low quality people to do whatever they could to land the job by faking and lying. All of these annoying interview tricks are just a way to try to filter out all the people (90% of them now) who taught themselves how to talk the talk but couldn’t program themselves out of a wet paper bag. And yes, there are ways to figure it out but it’s reall…
How did I do?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
> The daycare center aesthetic and all this weird pronoun crap achieves the same ends. If everyone around you is an androgynous alien speaking a novel language and communications mishaps will get you fired, you won't feel comfortable working there. I'd argue that if you can remember people's names, you can remember their preferred pronouns - and that if you can't, or refuse to because you think it's "weird crap", the…
I frequently in a meeting am unsure if I have or when I have met the person before, although I do find their face familiar. That is the first level of awkwardness to solve for me. Should I tell them "nice to meet you!" or "great to see you again after such a long time!".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What changed? Well it was about 2010, The industry became a target for very low quality people to do whatever they could to land the job by faking and lying. All of these annoying interview tricks are just a way to try to filter out all the people (90% of them now) who taught themselves how to talk the talk but couldn’t program themselves out of a wet paper bag. And yes, there are ways to figure it out but it’s reall…
The people who are fooled by fast talkers don’t care about the results of leetcode questions either.
> When interviewing as a software engineer, for example, you’ll run into places that lean heavily on algorithms interviews. And don’t get me wrong, those interviews can be fun (in the same way that Project Euler can be fun), but it’s not very relevant for most jobs I'm curious what changed around 2015-2016 that led to the current interview process. In the before times the interview was more of a technical conversatio…
In my field, understanding signals and systems, probability, optimization, and numerical computing is very important.
Leetcode, in comparison, offers a more confined scope, making preparation more manageable and systematic, ultimately helping me break into software engineering.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Great! Isn’t that the point? That some people who really don’t want the job won’t invest a bit of their time and people who do really want the job will?
[flagged]
I'm over 40, have been working since I was a teen, and I have understanding and empathy for things like preferred pronouns. Genuine appreciation for this can come from seeing how things were for people before we improved awareness and sensitivity. In practice, our improvements aren't always perfect, and they sometimes get misapplied or abused, but overall, people are trying, and some social/societal things are improving. Try to see past the rough spots and growing pains.
Even Leetcode interviews (which I think are very bad for software engineering), you can see why that gets cargo-culted. Especially if someone has never had a pre-puzzles/Leetcode interview, and doesn't know it can be better.
> When interviewing as a software engineer, for example, you’ll run into places that lean heavily on algorithms interviews. And don’t get me wrong, those interviews can be fun (in the same way that Project Euler can be fun), but it’s not very relevant for most jobs I'm curious what changed around 2015-2016 that led to the current interview process. In the before times the interview was more of a technical conversatio…
It all started in a few years earlier. Google had determined that there was a strong correlation between understanding fundamental computer science and being a strong software engineer, so they began testing for computer science fundamentals. At the time lots of companies were trying to mimic Google's success and it quickly became an industry standard. People began just studying how to answer these questions. The pop…
(I am not saying that this strong correlation exists.)