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

How to Interview Engineers

blog.triplebyte.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 489 posts

Re: How to Interview Engineers

#111

Post by zippergz »

bogomipz wrote: post #109

>"After an engineer passes our process, they go straight to the final interview at companies we work with (including Apple, Facebook, Dropbox and Stripe)." Can anyone from any of these companies confirm this? This strikes me as really odd. So only one employee from FB, Apple, Dropbox, and Stripe needs to interview a candidate that Tripplebyte say is a "Go"? I'm having a hard time believing that.

I don't think "the final interview" means a single person. I took it to mean the onsite round, with however many people that entails, skipping the recruiter screen, phone screen, etc.

Re: How to Interview Engineers

#112

Post by tkxxx7 »

Stratoscope wrote: post #105
bumbledraven wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> given the starting and ending times of two calendar appointments, determine whether or not they conflict. Say the first appointment goes from a to b and the second goes from c to d . What does it look like if the appointments _don't_ conflict? This happens just when one appointment ends no later than the other begins; in other words, when b ≤ c or d ≤ a . So, the appointments conflict just when not( b ≤ c or d ≤ a…

Consider appointments from 1-3 and 2-4: a = 1, b = 3, c = 2, d = 4. Do they conflict?

It's difficult to tell if GP miswrote, or you misunderstood, but it doesn't sound like they've made the mistake you're alluding to (I would expect them to be explicitly wrong).

Re: How to Interview Engineers

#113

Post by bogomipz »

altharaz wrote: post #17

At my company our engineers defined the following process. First, we defined the skills we're looking for i.e. Programming / SysAdmin / Cybersecurity. Our process goes as follows: 1. We ask candidates to answer a quizz by phone, with questions in the 3 chosen fields. Duration = 1h. 2. We ask candidates to solve remotely with Google Docs 5 real-world problems asking for skills in Algorithmics, Data Modeling, Object-Or…

>"We ask candidates to answer a quizz by phone, with questions in the 3 chosen fields. Duration = 1h."

You ask trivia questions for a whole hour? That seems pretty gratuitous. I think most people would tire of that after about 15 minutes.

>"We also add a bonus question like "how many people can get into a train". Duration = 1h."

You ask Fermi questions? Between an hour of trivia questions and one "bonus" Fermi question your process sounds pretty horrible to me.

Interviewing candidates is a two way street. There are many candidates who would not want to work for a company that thought asking a candidate an hours worth of trivia questions and a bonus Fermi question was acceptable. For many this would be a red flag.

Re: How to Interview Engineers

#114

Post by Stratoscope »

tkxxx7 wrote: post #112
Stratoscope wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Consider appointments from 1-3 and 2-4: a = 1, b = 3, c = 2, d = 4. Do they conflict?

It's difficult to tell if GP miswrote, or you misunderstood, but it doesn't sound like they've made the mistake you're alluding to (I would expect them to be explicitly wrong).

Hmm.. Perhaps I did misunderstand something. But if the test for a conflict is:

b > c and a > d

with conflicting appointments from 1-3 and 2-4:

a = 1, b = 3, c = 2, d = 4

won't that evaluate to:

3 > 2 and 1 > 4

true and false

false (no conflict)

I could be wrong, but I think you have to do all four comparisons as in aldarn's comment:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14641043

(no fair peeking!)

Re: How to Interview Engineers

#115

Post by pinot »

dcwca wrote: post #90
pinot wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not a programmer but wouldn't if (endtime[1] > starttime[2]){status=conflict} work? Assuming time is encoded in epoch format.

That's half of it, but doesn't account for the case when starttime[1] is later than endtime[2] and they don't intersect.

Good point. I didn't think about them not being written down in the list in chronological order by start time.

Re: How to Interview Engineers

#116

Post by Zephyr314 »

zippergz wrote: post #111
bogomipz wrote: post #109

>"After an engineer passes our process, they go straight to the final interview at companies we work with (including Apple, Facebook, Dropbox and Stripe)." Can anyone from any of these companies confirm this? This strikes me as really odd. So only one employee from FB, Apple, Dropbox, and Stripe needs to interview a candidate that Tripplebyte say is a "Go"? I'm having a hard time believing that.

I don't think "the final interview" means a single person. I took it to mean the onsite round, with however many people that entails, skipping the recruiter screen, phone screen, etc.

This interpretation is correct; they skip to onsite, but get a full onsite. (Source: we interview triplebyte candidates regularly)

Re: How to Interview Engineers

#117

Post by subatomic »

tkxxx7 wrote: post #112
Stratoscope wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Consider appointments from 1-3 and 2-4: a = 1, b = 3, c = 2, d = 4. Do they conflict?

It's difficult to tell if GP miswrote, or you misunderstood, but it doesn't sound like they've made the mistake you're alluding to (I would expect them to be explicitly wrong).

It appears what they're alluding to is this part: > the appointments conflict just when b > c and a > d.

which I first understood to be a conversational statement rather than a statement of logic (which I assume GP is referring to), in which case it should be (b > c or a > d).

Re: How to Interview Engineers

#118

Post by tkxxx7 »

Stratoscope wrote: post #114
tkxxx7 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's difficult to tell if GP miswrote, or you misunderstood, but it doesn't sound like they've made the mistake you're alluding to (I would expect them to be explicitly wrong).

Hmm.. Perhaps I did misunderstand something. But if the test for a conflict is: b > c and a > d with conflicting appointments from 1-3 and 2-4: a = 1, b = 3, c = 2, d = 4 won't that evaluate to: 3 > 2 and 1 > 4 true and false false (no conflict) I could be wrong, but I think you have to do all four comparisons as in aldarn's comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14641043 (no fair peeking!)

Yes, I do not think "and" here was meant as a logical constraint.

Re: How to Interview Engineers

#119

Post by ball_of_lint »

bumbledraven wrote: post #101
pklausler wrote: post #73

The sad reality of programming interviews is that it's absolutely necessary to ask several near-trivial questions in order to flush out the candidates with awesome resumes and impressive degrees who simply have no idea how to analyze a simple problem and solve it using a computer. Lately, I've been asking "given the starting and ending times of two calendar appointments, determine whether or not they conflict." No lo…

> given the starting and ending times of two calendar appointments, determine whether or not they conflict. Say the first appointment goes from a to b and the second goes from c to d . What does it look like if the appointments _don't_ conflict? This happens just when one appointment ends no later than the other begins; in other words, when b ≤ c or d ≤ a . So, the appointments conflict just when not( b ≤ c or d ≤ a…

You have a mistake in the last not of your formula. The opposite of da, not a>d.

Re: How to Interview Engineers

#120

Post by eneim »

bumbledraven wrote: post #101
pklausler wrote: post #73

The sad reality of programming interviews is that it's absolutely necessary to ask several near-trivial questions in order to flush out the candidates with awesome resumes and impressive degrees who simply have no idea how to analyze a simple problem and solve it using a computer. Lately, I've been asking "given the starting and ending times of two calendar appointments, determine whether or not they conflict." No lo…

> given the starting and ending times of two calendar appointments, determine whether or not they conflict. Say the first appointment goes from a to b and the second goes from c to d . What does it look like if the appointments _don't_ conflict? This happens just when one appointment ends no later than the other begins; in other words, when b ≤ c or d ≤ a . So, the appointments conflict just when not( b ≤ c or d ≤ a…

do you mean "b > c and d > a"?
Post reply on HN