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

Google: 90% of our engineers use the software you wrote (Homebrew), but...

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 683 posts

Re: Google: 90% of our engineers use the software you wrote (Homebrew), but...

#371

Post by SamReidHughes »

callum85 wrote: post #338
jblow wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am dismayed by the way all the reactions on Twitter are piling on with outrage and/or relating similar experiences. Inverting a binary tree is pretty easy. It is not quite as trivial as FizzBuzz, but it is something any programmer should be able to do. If you can't do it, you probably don't understand recursion, which is a very basic programming concept. This isn't one of those much-maligned trick interview questio…

> If you can't do it, you probably don't understand recursion No, I can't do it (don't even understand the question) but I certainly understand what recursion is, and can solve problems and make things work far more reliably than many of the more academic programmers I have worked with.

I believe "invert" here means to flip the left-right direction. A better word for it would be "mirror."

Re: Google: 90% of our engineers use the software you wrote (Homebrew), but...

#372

Post by seiji »

mkempe wrote: post #367
seiji wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People have previously mentioned hallway discussions at Google routinely devolve into bragging about SAT scores and GPAs. Nothing says Google must accept sub-par technical people, but Google fails to realize you don't have to be the top 0.0001% in absolute algorithms intelligence to do great work. Google's basic theme seems to be "you must be low latency ultra smart in our narrow interest areas" to pass an interview…

What is "Montessori naivety"?

Primarily my inability to spell naiveté.

It's one of those "gift/curse" things. It's good they can challenge assumptions, but they don't realize how wrong they are when they are wrong.

There are some notes at http://www.amazon.com/In-The-Plex-Google-Thinks/product-revi... and it's also drawn up nicely in the book itself.

Re: Google: 90% of our engineers use the software you wrote (Homebrew), but...

#373

Post by ciupicri »

exacube wrote: post #341
ciupicri wrote: post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If 90% of Google's engineers use his software, it's reasonable to expect to be hired for continuing to work on that software.

That may be somewhat true, depending on how crucial and dependent Google is on Homebrew. But 90% of Googlers don't rely on Brew for work. It is just a figure he made up to make a point about how popular his software is. Using his software outside the context of our jobs is no means to justify a hire. He should go through the same interview process as 90% (much higher than that actually) of Googlers.

My impression was that he was talking about usage for business, not personal purposes. As for the popularity, even if the 90% figure is made up, I was only trying to explain/justify his point of view.

Re: Google: 90% of our engineers use the software you wrote (Homebrew), but...

#374

Post by lucidguppy2000 »

hiou wrote: post #325
pan69 wrote: post #294

Personally I don't really care about Google's hiring process. It's unlikely I'd ever want to work there anyway. What does bother me is that other companies, who are not even in the same league as Google, start to copy their hiring process. I remember interviewing with a digital ad agency a few years back and I swear, these guys thought they were Google. The number of academic trivia questions that came up, it was rid…

I've been there as well. I interviewed at a design agency a while back. I nailed all of their puzzles pretty easily only to get there and realize I was going to be doing Wordpress hacking and other CMS work from 2010. I left after a few months because of how trivial I realized the work would be in the long term. On the exit meeting it was relayed to me that they were having trouble finding people because no one could…

Also - a big motivation for work is learning. Didn't someone say "never apply for a position your qualified for"?

Re: Google: 90% of our engineers use the software you wrote (Homebrew), but...

#375

Post by SamReidHughes »

Aloisius wrote: post #310
jblow wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe you're just not doing serious programming. Most people I know implement data structure searches quite often. If you're writing scripts, or JS code for web pages or something like that, then maybe you don't use CS stuff, but ... are you able to write a web browser if you had to? Are you able to write an operating system or navigational software for a spacecraft? If not, then maybe just see this as revealing sect…

> Maybe you're just not doing serious programming. Most people I know implement data structure searches quite often. Wow. Really? Most serious people I know use other people's implementations that have already been highly optimized and well tested because they have better shit to do than reinvent the wheel. I suppose if you want to write your own red-black tree from scratch, that's your prerogative. The last time I d…

Nobody's advocating rewriting your own red-black tree from scratch, for no reason. People applying data structures talent and skill aren't copying down algorithms they have in the standard library.

Re: Google: 90% of our engineers use the software you wrote (Homebrew), but...

#376

Post by dceddia »

jowiar wrote: post #188
rgbrenner wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Smart people will learn what they need to to do a job if they're interested in it. Google has decided that the only way to tell if someone is smart is by asking academic questions. Even though anyone with half a brain knows that there are other ways to gauge how smart a person is... such as experience. Does anyone really think Max can't look up how to invert a binary tree if he needs to do that? He obviously knows ho…

> Google is filled with smart people.. but their interview process is pretty stupid. Google is filled with people who can solve Data Structure / Algorithm questions in 50 minutes on a whiteboard. Their interview process selects for people whose past experiences led them to being able to solve Data Structure / Algorithm questions in 50 minutes on a whiteboard. The extent to which solving Data Structure / Algorithm que…

> Google is filled with people who can solve Data Structure / Algorithm questions in 50 minutes on a whiteboard.

I wonder about that, actually. I mean sure, right after they're hired, I bet they're GREAT at doing whiteboard problems. But then after a few years of real work, I bet they've coded about as many algorithms from scratch as the guy from Unknown, Inc. (which is approximately two) and they probably wouldn't even pass another Google interview without a boatload of practice.

Re: Google: 90% of our engineers use the software you wrote (Homebrew), but...

#377

Post by Blackthorn »

seiji wrote: post #249
endtime wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People have previously mentioned hallway discussions at Google routinely devolve into bragging about SAT scores and GPAs. I've been at Google for 3.5 years (in the NY office) and have never heard this. I don't think I've ever even seen anyone wear a college t-shirt/sweater.

It's probably a pathological case centered around the mountain view office: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5534904 / https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3473308

I worked in one of the Mountain View offices for a year and a half with people who had never even been to college, and never heard that. Doesn't mean it never happened but the idea that it's even close to common is just laughable.

I do wear my college t-shirt though. My graduating CS class was three people, so have to have a little pride there!

Re: Google: 90% of our engineers use the software you wrote (Homebrew), but...

#378

Post by MaysonL »

NeutronBoy wrote: post #330
seiji wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People have previously mentioned hallway discussions at Google routinely devolve into bragging about SAT scores and GPAs. Nothing says Google must accept sub-par technical people, but Google fails to realize you don't have to be the top 0.0001% in absolute algorithms intelligence to do great work. Google's basic theme seems to be "you must be low latency ultra smart in our narrow interest areas" to pass an interview…

> Nothing says Google must accept sub-par technical people, but Google fails to realize you don't have to be the top 0.0001% in absolute algorithms intelligence to do great work. But if you're Google, why wouldn't you aim for the top 0.0001%? It's not as though you have a shortage of candidates.

Do the math: 0.0001% of 7 billion is: 7,000. How many employees does Google have? Not to mention the fact that of those 7 billion, probably at least 6.9 billion have no appreciable training in software development, which would leave you with 100 candidates.

Re: Google: 90% of our engineers use the software you wrote (Homebrew), but...

#379

Post by cellularmitosis »

jblow wrote: post #271
notNow wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you confirm that actually inverting a BT or solving other similarly probs would have been part of his future job at Google? If so, they were consistent in disqualifying him in spite of his awesome track record, fame or "street cred" but if not, I can't really justify or defend this type of ceremonial or bureaucratic gotcha interview questions as they are just useless and can be abused by the interviewer to reject…

I have no idea what the job was. But my point is this is not a bureaucratic gotcha question. If you can't do this task, you don't really know how to program well. Sorry but that's just how it is. It's like failing FizzBuzz. There is this culture of crappy software that has happened lately, especially in the Web world, and it is really quite lamentable. I believe that a very large positive impact would be made on the…

I've never inverted a binary tree (I'm not familiar with the concept). You claim that makes me a bad programmer. Be careful there: just because somebody hasn't been exposed to something doesn't mean they aren't smart enough to figure it out. Fizz buzz is also flawed in this way: it doesn't test if you know how to program, it merely tests "have you been exposed to the modulo operator yet".

Re: Google: 90% of our engineers use the software you wrote (Homebrew), but...

#380

Post by rbanffy »

marktangotango wrote: post #368
logn wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was asked that question about 7 years after reading Mastering Regular Expressions and about 10 years after taking Automata in college. It so happens that I am an expert in regex, have a patent in the field, regularly answer stackoverflow regex questions for fun, etc. Unfortunately, the question involved me actually drawing a DFA, trying to remember the notation, etc. At this point I don't even remember the particul…

Circles for states and arrows for transitions between states? Is there anything more to it than that?

I think you use "sausages" for initial and final states...

I too don't remember much.

Post reply on HN