I can't read anything about Richard Feynman without thinking of the letter he wrote his wife 16 months after she passed away. "I love my wife. My wife is dead."
If Richard Feynman applied for a job at Microsoft (2002)
171–180 of 220 posts
Re: If Richard Feynman applied for a job at Microsoft (2002)
#172How many ping pong balls would it take to fill a 747? Why do you ask? What problem are you trying to solve? We want to understand your thought process I'd think it was stupid to fill a 747 with ping pong balls and think about something else
I don't get the derision for these kinds of problems. And I think it's unlikely Feynman would have found this unhelpful. These are commonly referred to as Fermi problems. Fermi was a physicist of Feynman's generation - they were probably standing together at Trinity when Fermi did the famous yield approximation. The other physicists held this ability in such esteem they gave it a name and remembered him for it. The q…
Indeed. Feynman talked in ‘surely you’re joking..’ about his affection for MIT students in his fraternity setting one another puzzles, and he talked about the question of how trains go round corners being one he found particularly interesting. In fact he repeats it in this interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7h4OtFDnYE
He doesn’t answer the question ‘how does a train stay on the track’ with ‘some trains don’t’; he doesn’t switch to talking about rollercoaster trains and insist that the way they stay on the track is with horizontal wheels. He finds the logical, geometrically satisfying answer quite delightful.
And in fact, in many cases the flanges which he says are just for safety and aren’t supposed to impact the track because otherwise they make a terrible sound… are expected to hit the track to help the train make it round particularly tight turns. Coming from New York and having ridden the subways you’d think Feynman would know there are some corners subway trains take where the flanges rub all the way round, and the lovely conical wheels aren’t what keeps the train on the track at all.
So I definitely find this a weird characterization of a Feynman-ish approach to this kind of problem. I think he’d probably have delighted in the geometric neatness of why circular or triangular manhole covers can’t fall down their holes, and been happy to ignore the practical fact of square ones for the sake of a good puzzle story.
Re: If Richard Feynman applied for a job at Microsoft (2002)
#173Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't get the derision for these kinds of problems. And I think it's unlikely Feynman would have found this unhelpful. These are commonly referred to as Fermi problems. Fermi was a physicist of Feynman's generation - they were probably standing together at Trinity when Fermi did the famous yield approximation. The other physicists held this ability in such esteem they gave it a name and remembered him for it. The q…
The 747 ping pong ball estimation problem is a Fermi problem, where the goal is to get the right order of magnitude of the answer. Sure. But "why are manhole covers round?" is not. It's a stupid "have you ever heard this clever fact" question that's often designed just to figure out if you're clever and/or lucky vs testing actual knowledge and skill. If your aim in interviewing is to fill the team with people who lov…
I do agree that logic puzzles which require a single observation and/or have a binary outcome tend to be very bad interview questions. That being said, I think the original post demonstrates that the issue with the manhole cover problem isn't necessarily the question itself, but how it's evaluated. I'd be quite pleased if I were asking the question and the interviewee gave that answer (though I might raise the point that the configuration necessary to drop a rectangular cover is also one of the most ergonomic for holding it). The general notion that there is a single right and wrong answer is incongruous with a class of question used to evaluate the candidate's reasoning ability. Though I wouldn't be surprised if these were historically evaluated appropriately and candidates simply misinferred why they were being rejected.
Re: If Richard Feynman applied for a job at Microsoft (2002)
#174How many ping pong balls would it take to fill a 747? Why do you ask? What problem are you trying to solve? We want to understand your thought process I'd think it was stupid to fill a 747 with ping pong balls and think about something else
The correct answer really depends on what role the candidate is trying to get.
An engineering person would come up with the thought process to their estimate.
A business person might start asking questions about the business needs for trying to fill a 747 with ping pong balls.
But someone trying to get an engineering role should think twice before trying to sound smart and replying in an out of line manner.
Re: If Richard Feynman applied for a job at Microsoft (2002)
#175How many ping pong balls would it take to fill a 747? Why do you ask? What problem are you trying to solve? We want to understand your thought process I'd think it was stupid to fill a 747 with ping pong balls and think about something else
>We want to understand your thought process
That's one reason, but from my personal experience interviewing, an even bigger signal is a candidate's attitude to a challenge. I've found that the best candidates tend to be those who 'own' the challenge such that they clearly get excited about solving it themselves, rather than just to please the interviewer.
>Why do you ask? This is a particularly interesting question, as I'd say it's asked by the best and the worst and the best performers, the best looking to solve the underlying problem, and the worst looking to shirk responsibility.
Re: If Richard Feynman applied for a job at Microsoft (2002)
#176Earlier quoted context omitted.
Almost everyone was sexist in his time. But yes, let's please continue to cancel history.
Your statement is what’s wrong with how history is viewed. I wasn’t talking specifically to the article, but the comments. He’s being glorified for his personality and his sexist views are were very much apart of his personality. Don’t erase him from history, but also don’t act like he is some role model.
Please show me where anyone in this thread is glorifying anything close to sexism.
Re: If Richard Feynman applied for a job at Microsoft (2002)
#177Could've been funny if the interviewee was someone like Descartes rather than one of the most lucid, funny and friendly voices of the 20th century.
Re: If Richard Feynman applied for a job at Microsoft (2002)
#178Earlier quoted context omitted.
An interesting little tid-bit: I've read that Feynman was sitting in a truck at Trinity, and I think he was alone. Feynman calculated that the truck's windscreen would absorb enough of the bomb's UV emissions to obviate the need for additional eye protection. The same source (which I cannot currently locate) said that everyone else was wearing welding masks/goggles.
If he was alone why was "everyone else" wearing goggles?
You really gunning for that QA job, are you ?
Re: If Richard Feynman applied for a job at Microsoft (2002)
#179Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't get the derision for these kinds of problems. And I think it's unlikely Feynman would have found this unhelpful. These are commonly referred to as Fermi problems. Fermi was a physicist of Feynman's generation - they were probably standing together at Trinity when Fermi did the famous yield approximation. The other physicists held this ability in such esteem they gave it a name and remembered him for it. The q…
The 747 ping pong ball estimation problem is a Fermi problem, where the goal is to get the right order of magnitude of the answer. Sure. But "why are manhole covers round?" is not. It's a stupid "have you ever heard this clever fact" question that's often designed just to figure out if you're clever and/or lucky vs testing actual knowledge and skill. If your aim in interviewing is to fill the team with people who lov…
> But "why are manhole covers round?" is not. It's a stupid "have you ever heard this clever fact" question that's often designed just to figure out if you're clever and/or lucky vs testing actual knowledge and skill.
I once had this interview question, gave them the expected answer, and cited the source of that answer. I never did get that job.
I am going to take your claim a step further and assert that this type of question can only reliably test cleverness if the interviewee is properly primed (e.g. there was a prior discussion of workplace safety), then the important thing is explaining why. Otherwise the only way to arrive at the answer is to realize that construction/maintenance workplaces place a high priority on safety. That isn't the type of thing you're likely to think about during an interview for a programming position.
Re: If Richard Feynman applied for a job at Microsoft (2002)
#180Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your statement is what’s wrong with how history is viewed. I wasn’t talking specifically to the article, but the comments. He’s being glorified for his personality and his sexist views are were very much apart of his personality. Don’t erase him from history, but also don’t act like he is some role model.
Please show me where anyone in this thread is glorifying anything close to sexism.
You have poor reading comprehension. Glorying him and his personality includes his sexist personality as well.