Amazon software engineer interview • Hacker News Board

Re: Amazon software engineer interview

#121

Post by dgemm » Sat, Jul 09, 2016, 3:07 AM UTC

_halgari wrote: post #20

blueatlas wrote: post #9

In total I had a little less than one month to prepare for the interview. I can't help but to wonder if it was really worth it. Surely, his prep helped him get the job, but the entire prep stage he describes seems like a very high up-front cost. I've always felt that if I can't get through an interview with a little prep and my existing skills, I don't belong. You should know exactly why you want to work for Amazon.…

I tend to agree. In my opinion, if a job interview required me to brush up that much on a topic it either means: a) the company is putting to much emphasis on "non-google" programming, which doesn't match reality (real software engineering isn't a closed book test). b) I don't know the subject matter well enough and it would be a bad fit anyways.

> the company is putting to much emphasis on "non-google" programming, which doesn't match reality (real software engineering isn't a closed book test)

Maybe if you work on gluing together APIs then the googling aspect is more important...? In this case I find the term "software engineering" to be a stretch...

Re: Amazon software engineer interview

#122

Post by dpark » Sat, Jul 09, 2016, 3:09 AM UTC

lj3 wrote: post #114

dpark wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't honestly think you're going to get much more than Fibonacci in a one day pair programming session on an unknown codebase. It's just too much to learn before you can really accomplish anything. Beyond one or maybe two days it just becomes an unreasonable request, regardless of whether they pay you.

Oh, I think I misunderstood what you meant by "get real work" out of somebody. IMHO, pair programming isn't getting real work out of somebody. I'm with tptacek on this one: take home programming tests. Specifically, tests where they give you specs for something and you build it however you like.

I'm ok with something like that if it's a reasonable amount of work, and if it's not going to be followed up with the standard interview loop. Extremely long take home work is unreasonable to me. Studying for interviews is at least applicable to many companies. A take home is just for the one. And if it's followed up with a normal interview loop, then it's just more but not better.

Re: Amazon software engineer interview

#123

Post by kelukelugames » Sat, Jul 09, 2016, 3:16 AM UTC

pfarnsworth wrote: post #2

If he signed an NDA, I probably wouldn't write a blog post about the interview process, that's a good way of getting fired for cause, since the late 1990s.

I interviewed at about a dozen companies two years ago and published every single question. NDAs don't cover interview questions. I asked the employers. Still got offered and nobody sued.

Re: Amazon software engineer interview

#124

Post by scaleout1 » Sat, Jul 09, 2016, 3:17 AM UTC

This article makes me sad. Interviewing in our industry is so broken. I have been out of school for a while and switch jobs every few years and this is the technique I use to beat the bullshit interview process

. Make a list of companies that I would apply to and sort them from most interesting to no-way-in-hell-i-am-working-here order

. spend a weak reviewing typical algo/data structure questions

. For the companies that I absolutely want to work for, I review every single glassdoor review and write down the interview questions. Remember, most companies have question banks and most interviewers have favorite questions which results in same questions being asked over an over again. You want to exploit that

. Then to get over my interviewing jitters, I interview at a few companies where I would absolutely not work at. This results in no pressure interview practise and you can literally laugh at their asinine interview questions and walk out

. Finally, for the companies i actually want to work at, I try my best to get rid of phone screen. This is usually accomplished by dazzling them with my decent size github profile, contributing some fixes to their OSS project or finding someone who already works there that is in my alumni network

. Then when you finally arrive for the interview, you have real world interview practise, they are already impressed with your github profile/references and biased toward you versus some random joe off the street and you have made sure you have a pretty high probability of getting a question that you have already seen or is similar to a question you already know.

This technique has helped me get Jobs at top 5 employers in the valley along with a few startups. The reason I am posting this here is to demonstrate how broken, unfair and easy to game this whole process is

Re: Amazon software engineer interview

#125

Post by lostcolony » Sat, Jul 09, 2016, 3:20 AM UTC

linkregister wrote: post #49

lostcolony wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had the same problem with Microsoft (atoi), and the same issue with the interviewer (being a C guy)...the issue there was that he thought (stringInstance).length() was an O(n) op, so the fact I was calling it in my loop meant my algorithm was O(n^2). My explaining that, no, Java stores the length as part of the object...kinda tanked the interview.

You describe the "interview anti-loop," a term coined by Steve Yegge, a prolific blogger who wrote about the Google interview process. Better luck next time. I've come across it a few times myself. Also I've legitimately bombed interviews, sending apology emails to the recruiter immediately after leaving.

Oh, there won't be a next time. A bit of sour grapes, but I also legitimately don't want to work for Microsoft. Even then it was more exploring my options; that interview tanking was more cynically amusing than it was disheartening.

Re: Amazon software engineer interview

#126

Post by akp__ » Sat, Jul 09, 2016, 3:24 AM UTC

wyc wrote: post #107

How unfair that you're expected to sign an NDA on the spot. I'm sure that Amazon and other software companies have spent tens/hundreds of thousands of dollars to protect their IP, yet you don't even get the most basic legal counsel. Why couldn't they mail it out after the phone screening? This almost feels like duress.

I have interviewed with Amazon somewhat recently.

The NDA was very short (I'm not a lawyer, but it didn't seem nearly complicated enough to warrant needing a lawyer to read it) and the recruiters gave us time to look over it. There was nothing ridiculous in it and it was only to cover the interview process.

As far as I remember it was just stuff like "don't share details about what goes on in our interviews with others" which is pretty reasonable.

Re: Amazon software engineer interview

#127

Post by enraged_camel » Sat, Jul 09, 2016, 3:24 AM UTC

scaleout1 wrote: post #124

This article makes me sad. Interviewing in our industry is so broken. I have been out of school for a while and switch jobs every few years and this is the technique I use to beat the bullshit interview process . Make a list of companies that I would apply to and sort them from most interesting to no-way-in-hell-i-am-working-here order . spend a weak reviewing typical algo/data structure questions . For the companies…

>>Then to get over my interviewing jitters, I interview at a few companies where I would absolutely not work at. This results in no pressure interview practise and you can literally laugh at their asinine interview questions and walk out

This sounds very unethical and dishonest. It's the equivalent of a company interviewing a candidate they have zero intention of hiring, ever. Why waste people's time?

edit: not sure why I'm being downvoted. Am I wrong? How would you feel if you spent time preparing for an interview, did the interview and then found out the company didn't intend to hire you in the first place?

Re: Amazon software engineer interview

#128

Post by lohengramm » Sat, Jul 09, 2016, 3:26 AM UTC

This seems like a very standard process, but personally the best interview I have done was a take-home exercise involving a real world problem. It took me a whole day to do it, but I only had to do exactly what I do best: write code, silently, "in the zone".

No interview environment will ever simulate "the zone", and there is no way to truly test a programmer out of it.

Re: Amazon software engineer interview

#129

Post by driverdan » Sat, Jul 09, 2016, 3:26 AM UTC

Between bad interviews I've been in or read about and spending the past 6+ months working on our hiring process I've become very opinionated about hiring.

The process Amazon and many other tech companies use is fucking terrible. Algorithm tests and surprise CS 101 questions do not identify good employees. They're biased towards recent grads, do not address most real world situations, can be gamed through studying, and do not identify people who can actually think. You should not be testing for people who interview well, you should be testing for people who will make good employees.

You need to test real world scenarios. If they're going to be re-implementing bubble sort and doing binary math then fine, use HackerRank. Otherwise you need to have candidates work on a project based on what they'll actually be doing. Will they be working on APIs? Have them build or integrate with an API. Mapping in an iOS app? Have them do that.

Do not drop big surprises on candidates. Respect them and they will respect you. Tell them what to expect up front. The first email we send includes an outline of our entire hiring process with a list of each step. I've lost track of how many people have thanked me for this. Going through an interview blind is extremely stressful and increases the likelihood of losing good candidates.

My goal is to set people up for success. If their skills match what we're looking for I want them to succeed. I don't want them to fail because they are bad negotiators, didn't have time to study CS questions, or don't fit the typical stereotypes of a programmer.

Re: Amazon software engineer interview

#130

Post by adrenalinelol » Sat, Jul 09, 2016, 3:56 AM UTC

enraged_camel wrote: post #127

scaleout1 wrote: post #124

This article makes me sad. Interviewing in our industry is so broken. I have been out of school for a while and switch jobs every few years and this is the technique I use to beat the bullshit interview process . Make a list of companies that I would apply to and sort them from most interesting to no-way-in-hell-i-am-working-here order . spend a weak reviewing typical algo/data structure questions . For the companies…

>>Then to get over my interviewing jitters, I interview at a few companies where I would absolutely not work at. This results in no pressure interview practise and you can literally laugh at their asinine interview questions and walk out This sounds very unethical and dishonest. It's the equivalent of a company interviewing a candidate they have zero intention of hiring, ever. Why waste people's time? edit: not sure…

Companies reject candidates (and thus waste their time) for extremely arbitrary reasons. I'd suspect you're being down-voted by those who feel they've suffered such.