No, I still don't want to work for Google • Hacker News Board

Re: No, I still don't want to work for Google

#81

Post by theevocater » Mon, Oct 29, 2012, 4:21 PM UTC

redwood wrote: post #73

raldi wrote: post #41

Please don't propagate the myth that Google asks prospective programmers questions like, "How many golf balls could you fit on a bus?" Google interviewers list the questions they asked when they write up their conclusions, and anyone who asked a question like that for an engineering interview would be immediately contacted by the hiring commitee and told not to do it again.

Why would that even be a bad question to ask?

Because they've been shown time and time again to tell you if someone is good at answering brain teasers rather than if someone is good at being a programmer/engineer/whatever.

Re: No, I still don't want to work for Google

#82

Post by seanmcdirmid » Mon, Oct 29, 2012, 4:22 PM UTC

kordless wrote: post #77

spindritf wrote: post #43

I may be making the problem worse but both this post and the comments section are some of the worst I've seen on HN -- from linkbaity title to incorrect possessive pronouns (I barely speak English and caught it while skimming), and then the deep analysis of anonymity on G+ completely based on one or two anecdotes with no relation to G+, anonymity, or even the Internet. Why is this submission at 80 upvotes? What value…

I think the post is negative. With all the awesome stuff going on in tech, I don't think we need to spend our time writing (or reading!) negative posts like this. It's unlikely to help anyone and only serves to get the rest of us all upset. Google has done some awesome stuff and the experience of a few (or even a moderate amout) people who have worked there isn't helpful to the conversation.

Good news is fluffy candy that is tasty but not very useful. Bad news is harder to eat but is much more useful for survival reasons. Bad-experience outliers at Google are then more interesting than average or good outliers. Having a pointless conversation about the joys and successes of Google really doesn't allow me to "know" anything, which is the point of coming here.

Re: No, I still don't want to work for Google

#83

Post by Jabbles » Mon, Oct 29, 2012, 4:23 PM UTC

utopkara wrote: post #71

Jabbles wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What prevented you from moving to a different field? Is Google not the dynamic, chaotic mass of teams that I've been led to believe?

LOL. Google is still a company, and the employees are hired to deliver stuff that the executives decide is important. It is not a college or grad school where you can switch between majors or research topics at will. Usually you have to stay for about 18 months in an assignment before you can successfully change to another group. Otherwise, there's always the door; which almost everybody prefers, considering how easy…

Interesting. I thought the various groups inside Google competed for engineers? To the extent that there are posters advertising working on Chrome/Android etc.

Given that it is "easy" for people to leave, I would have thought the policies would be forced to change?

Re: No, I still don't want to work for Google

#84

Post by timfrietas » Mon, Oct 29, 2012, 4:23 PM UTC

rmrfrmrf wrote: post #24

One thing I can't stand is "recruiters" who invite you to come interview with them. Oh, great, you "invite" me to come torture myself for months on end just so I can have a snowball's chance in hell at getting a job? This is 2012. If you want to learn about me, go on my website and read my blog posts, look at my current projects, and download my resumé. If you think I'm so great, make me an offer. Don't spam my inbox…

As someone who does a fair amount of hiring, I would never hire someone off the strength of their (supposed) work alone. The ability to problem solve under pressure and their ability to communicate effectively with others are really important factors I won't get from looking at their Github account.

Re: No, I still don't want to work for Google

#85

Post by _pferreir_ » Mon, Oct 29, 2012, 4:26 PM UTC

simonsarris wrote: post #46

c0nsumer wrote: post #19

Back in 2007 I got quite far through the Google hiring process, up to an on-site interview and being told to expect an offer the Thursday after I returned home. I was ready to move half-way across the country and get started living in the bay area, moving my life to there. That Thursday came and went, and I found out that due to some internal bar-raising I would not be receiving an offer. I stayed here in the Detroit…

I always thought that strange too. I get a fair number of recruiter emails, and almost all of them seem to assume out of hand that relocation is the least of my concerns, when it probably easily the #1 thing. Every reply I give[1] ends up being a cheeky way of mentioning that I have a life and a home in a place and I do not intend to abandon it for a mere job. Perhaps my current job isn't the most interesting thing i…

Let's hope you can afford to do that for many years to come. When the choice is between relocating or unemployment, an average job offer suddenly gets much more interesting.

Unfortunately, here in Europe things are starting to change for the worse.

Re: No, I still don't want to work for Google

#86

Post by vidarh » Mon, Oct 29, 2012, 4:27 PM UTC

varelse wrote: post #28

I worked at Google for a short stint. I found the tech interview easy and I wasn't asked anything particularly ridiculous. I received a job offer shortly thereafter and accepted. As someone who regularly interviews prospective engineers at my current gig, I see no problem with expecting candidates to arrive prepared to answer algorithm questions or questions about their strongest programming language. Ditto for someo…

If Googles interviews had seemed to be remotely reasonable, I'm sure the people complaining would have been fewer. As it is, they seems very much to have the attitude that it doesn't matter if they weed out tons of great candidates as long as they weed out the bozos too.

I once went through technical phone screening with them for a management position, and was bizarrely asked lots of probing questions about unix filesystem internals. Which I answered with descriptions of how it varied by implementation for 3-4 different filesystems I've worked with over the years. But I hadn't worked with his pet filesystem and so couldn't answer everything the way he liked.

In the end the recruiter came back to me totally exasperated after he'd failed me. She'd looked at my feedback and taken it to some committee, and had the tech interview thrown out after they realised the type of questions I'd been given.

But by then I'd have time to reflect about the fact that the guy who interviewed me was on the team I'd been expected to manage, and I did not like the thought of a team like that. Couple that with a process that seems almost designed to push away people who aren't desperate to work there, and particularly people who have plenty of other alternatives, and I lost interest.

(Blind allocation for example, is not something I'd subject myself to - the only reason I said yes to that interview round was because it was for a specific position)

Re: No, I still don't want to work for Google

#87

Post by thwest » Mon, Oct 29, 2012, 4:27 PM UTC

bmelton wrote: post #22

tangue wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Average white guy might need his anonymity too. Don't think you or other people at Google are a representative sample of the society. The outcry is justified.

I didn't meant to imply that it wasn't justified, just that I can't identify with it. As I said, and I didn't mean to seem oppressive, I empathize with the plight of those who wish to be able to express things in anonymity, I just personally value the kinds of conversations that occur when people are using their real names more highly. Basically, what may be a need for those in the other camp is simply a preference f…

I'm amazed and pleased at your self awareness and honesty in this thread. Thank you. If you could give some thought to the responsibility (and unique opportunity) us normals have to fight oppressive structures from within, I would personally appreciate it.

From that perspective, I think you are confusing "empathize" with "understand". If you empathized, you would be more likely to be more concerned with the needs of others than your weak preferences.

Re: No, I still don't want to work for Google

#88

Post by rb2k_ » Mon, Oct 29, 2012, 4:27 PM UTC

varelse wrote: post #28

I worked at Google for a short stint. I found the tech interview easy and I wasn't asked anything particularly ridiculous. I received a job offer shortly thereafter and accepted. As someone who regularly interviews prospective engineers at my current gig, I see no problem with expecting candidates to arrive prepared to answer algorithm questions or questions about their strongest programming language. Ditto for someo…

> If you're unwilling to provide proof you're not a bozo, you're probably going to be just awful to work with as well.

I always liked the idea of people looking at your previous work (github, ...) and having a pleasant conversation about it rather than making engineers jump through hoops.

Especially if the company comes to you I think it's a weird thing that they'd assume you're a "bozo".

Given how lax the US employment laws are, you can always fire somebody if they turn out to be a bozo after all.

Re: No, I still don't want to work for Google

#89

Post by sxp » Mon, Oct 29, 2012, 4:27 PM UTC

varelse wrote: post #28

I worked at Google for a short stint. I found the tech interview easy and I wasn't asked anything particularly ridiculous. I received a job offer shortly thereafter and accepted. As someone who regularly interviews prospective engineers at my current gig, I see no problem with expecting candidates to arrive prepared to answer algorithm questions or questions about their strongest programming language. Ditto for someo…

The allocation policy is something that people are not fans of, but it isn't as bad as you make it sound. When I joined Google, I also initially joined a team that was a bad fit for me. However, I transferred to a completely different team (from enterprise server software to consumer mobile software) after 4 months of near zero productivity, and the new team was a perfect fit.

Much of Google's culture is based on being willing to tolerate mistakes and fix them rather getting everything perfect the first time. This applies to both the computer systems (the system should keep running even if part of the network fails) and people. In the latter case, it means the person should be aware that things aren't always perfect and proactively try to adapt and improve the situation. Unfortunately, this chaotic method doesn't always work for everyone and people who want perfect order end up getting stuck in a position they don't like, burn out, and leave. Ultimately, this is bad because it results in the loss of good employees who don't like this chaos, and I'm sorry that it happened to you, varelse. However, I prefer this over a situation where I would interview for a given position and my offer would be based on whether or not I was a good fit for the position that particular position. That method would result in losing people who would be able to fit in well somewhere at Google but not with that specific team.

Re: No, I still don't want to work for Google

#90

Post by frogpelt » Mon, Oct 29, 2012, 4:28 PM UTC

erikpukinskis wrote: post #72

spindritf wrote: post #43

I may be making the problem worse but both this post and the comments section are some of the worst I've seen on HN -- from linkbaity title to incorrect possessive pronouns (I barely speak English and caught it while skimming), and then the deep analysis of anonymity on G+ completely based on one or two anecdotes with no relation to G+, anonymity, or even the Internet. Why is this submission at 80 upvotes? What value…

Sorry, I must be being dense. How is the title linkbaity? It's as close to a literal description of the article content as I can imagine. What should the title be?

It seemed like linkbait to me, too. It sounds like a slightly different version of "Why I left Google."