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

That time when I failed the Microsoft interview

ochagavia.nl

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 322 posts

Re: That time when I failed the Microsoft interview

#281

Post by mircerlancerous »

peebee67 wrote: post #159
mircerlancerous wrote: post #18

Sadly I've seen this kind of interviewing from lots of places; maybe it's a technique they teach in college or something. Interview questions like this are useless as they are not an accurate approximation of a real work scenario. I've frozen up at a whiteboard in an interview before, and then figured it out on the drive home. The best approach I've found is to do a send home quiz, and then ask them questions about t…

> Bonus: put some typos in the quiz that don't matter. Red flag for the people that get hung up on that. I feel like after presenting a great solution to the stupid, cryptic, arbitrary interviewer games where you have to guess the rules on your only attempt at playing the game, you've added one at the last minute. What if one of the values is attention to detail?

Attention to details that matter and knowing what to pass on, is what's important. If they did poorly on the important stuff but then point out the typo, clearly they were putting their efforts in the wrong places

Re: That time when I failed the Microsoft interview

#282

Post by modeless »

lightedman wrote: post #239
modeless wrote: post #65

Once long ago when I interviewed at Apple I was asked the classic "fork in the road, two guys, one always tells the truth and one always lies" riddle, with complete earnestness as far as I could tell. Possibly the single worst interview question I've ever been asked. Of course I told the interviewer I'd heard it before and then gave the correct answer. In my case we just ended up chatting about previous experience in…

"I was asked the classic "fork in the road, two guys, one always tells the truth and one always lies" riddle" To which I always reply "I just start beating the crap out of one at random - the reaction of the both victim and witness will tell me which is which."

Uhh, strong reject

Re: That time when I failed the Microsoft interview

#283

Post by ThrowawayR2 »

pjmlp wrote: post #135
nmfisher wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably explains why Microsoft hasn't made a good product in...as long as I can remember. It's all shibboleths and gate-keeping.

They are not the only ones, Google is famous for this kind of stuff, and then you look into Android code quality.

Google was more elitist than most in its early years. As I recall, candidates had to have graduated from an elite CS program with and provide a transcript when applying showing top grades.

Re: That time when I failed the Microsoft interview

#284

Post by arjie »

tptacek wrote: post #277
arjie wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, you and rahimnathwani up there have convinced me. Now I have to go around and deprogram everyone I said this to...

It's a really widespread myth, hard to fault anybody for believing it. There's even a kernel of truth to it (Griggs).

Would you mind helping me understand what degree the truth is? More here about my confusion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49171999

Re: That time when I failed the Microsoft interview

#285

Post by rahimnathwani »

arjie wrote: post #275
rahimnathwani wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"illegal unless it has passed through a battery of compliance paperwork" "This is literally a Title VII violation." Griggs v. Duke Power Co. held that "The [Civil Rights] Act [of 1964] does not preclude the use of testing or measuring procedures, but it does proscribe giving them controlling force unless they are demonstrably a reasonable measure of job performance." Why do you believe that prior documentation is req…

Wow, I am entirely wrong here, huh? I thought that "demonstrably a reasonable measure of job performance" was held to the standard that it had to be proven fair (and consequently documented to have proven job impact). EDIT: Hang on, I decided to just test the idea with the usual suspects and I don't see how you could design this in a way that works. You'd need some kind of non-contaminated testable outcome - lines of…

Your last statement is closer to the real situation, but you make it sound like it's certain that you will be called upon to defend the legality of your actions.

But I'm not aware of any evidence showing that is true.

And, even if it were true in the past, it seems that the DOJ believes that was based on a misinterpretation of the law. So it is less likely be true since June 2026: https://www.justice.gov/olc/media/1444871/dl

Re: That time when I failed the Microsoft interview

#286

Post by modeless »

voidfunc wrote: post #177
pjmlp wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am on my 50's now, if I have to prove that I am worthwhile being an employee with such teasers instead of what I have done thus far, I rather spend my time elsewhere, unless I am desperate for getting the position.

Honestly that may be just the reaction the company was hoping for which is both valuable for you and them. You save time not going through an interview for a place you might dislike and they get to move on quickly.

Yeah I can see people using these as proxies for age discrimination

Re: That time when I failed the Microsoft interview

#287

Post by pjmlp »

ThrowawayR2 wrote: post #283
pjmlp wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are not the only ones, Google is famous for this kind of stuff, and then you look into Android code quality.

Google was more elitist than most in its early years. As I recall, candidates had to have graduated from an elite CS program with and provide a transcript when applying showing top grades.

This same Google,

> The key point here is our programmers are Googlers, they’re not researchers. They’re typically, fairly young, fresh out of school, probably learned Java, maybe learned C or C++, probably learned Python. They’re not capable of understanding a brilliant language but we want to use them to build good software. So, the language that we give them has to be easy for them to understand and easy to adopt

> It must be familiar, roughly C-like. Programmers working at Google are early in their careers and are most familiar with procedural languages, particularly from the C family. The need to get programmers productive quickly in a new language means that the language cannot be too radical

One would expect folks coming from an elite CS program, and able to master Google's hiring processes, to be a bit more skilful.

Ironically all those four languages that get mentioned have quite advanced type systems, versus the one for "simple" minds.

Re: That time when I failed the Microsoft interview

#288

Post by rahimnathwani »

inigyou wrote: post #278
rahimnathwani wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there a specific page on his blog that answers my question? His suggestions for improving public transport are not relevant to this discussion.

You might alternatively prefer the ones about how health insurance never denies care, Luigi Mangione was a bad guy, or Democrats have made it profitable to be a victim.

From your descriptions they don't seem relevant to this discussion.

Re: That time when I failed the Microsoft interview

#289

Post by tptacek »

arjie wrote: post #275
rahimnathwani wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"illegal unless it has passed through a battery of compliance paperwork" "This is literally a Title VII violation." Griggs v. Duke Power Co. held that "The [Civil Rights] Act [of 1964] does not preclude the use of testing or measuring procedures, but it does proscribe giving them controlling force unless they are demonstrably a reasonable measure of job performance." Why do you believe that prior documentation is req…

Wow, I am entirely wrong here, huh? I thought that "demonstrably a reasonable measure of job performance" was held to the standard that it had to be proven fair (and consequently documented to have proven job impact). EDIT: Hang on, I decided to just test the idea with the usual suspects and I don't see how you could design this in a way that works. You'd need some kind of non-contaminated testable outcome - lines of…

Several (not many relative to the total industry, but several) large household-name companies publicly do general cognitive testing for white collar roles, and the companies that administer these tests have logo crawls just like any SAAS company of their clients. These companies have enormously deep pockets and would be juicy targets for employment law practices. But nothing happens, because this is mostly not a real thing.

The reason more companies don't do this is that the tests don't work well for this purpose.

Re: That time when I failed the Microsoft interview

#290

Post by vdfs »

AlecBG wrote: post #86
lostlogin wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no idea and want the answers: Boat + bowling ball = level stays the same? Ball roll = the constant gradient is quickest?

First one water is lower. Ball is more dense than water, in boat displaces its weight in water, in water displaces it's volume Dip for hill roll is faster

> Ball is more dense than water

Wouldn't that mean the water level will raise a bit because: displaced weight > displaced volume?

Post reply on HN