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

Google's “Director of Engineering” Hiring Test

gwan.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 969 posts

Re: Google's “Director of Engineering” Hiring Test

#211

Post by smrtinsert »

jackweirdy wrote: post #59
lordnacho wrote: post #13

I'm amazed he knew things in such detail. I mean who would know just how long a MAC address is? Or what the actual SYN/ACK etc tcp flags are? You just need to know what they're used for, and if you need the specifics, you'll find out with a single search. He seemed to know that as well though. Kernighan for bit twiddling algos, that kind of thing. It's a bit strange to have someone non-technical interviewing a techie…

Medical Recruiter: "What are mitochondria?" Applicant Doctor: "They're double membrane-bound organelles found in all eukaryotic organisms, commonly between 0.75 and 3μm in diameter, that generate most of the cell's supply of adenosine triphosphate" Recruiter: "No. They are the powerhouse of the cell".

I get it, but do doctors really know what the size of mitochondria are? I can't think of anything any further from the realm of their day to day.

Re: Google's “Director of Engineering” Hiring Test

#213

Post by DelaneyM »

FWIW: I have interviewed twice at Google for Dir. Eng. jobs, both times going the distance. (Once rejected after a few weeks, once received an offer two months later, too late to accept.) In those interviews, I was never asked a seriously hard technical question, let alone an annoyingly academic and trivial one such as those in this post. Rather, I felt like they did a pretty solid job of understanding how I would engage with the organization and perform in the role.

Though the lack of technical rigor was not surprising in evaluating me for a administrative & support position, the lack thereof in the onsite portion was something I sent explicit feedback about afterwards.

Re: Google's “Director of Engineering” Hiring Test

#214

Post by danvasquez29 »

tptacek wrote: post #52
lordnacho wrote: post #13

I'm amazed he knew things in such detail. I mean who would know just how long a MAC address is? Or what the actual SYN/ACK etc tcp flags are? You just need to know what they're used for, and if you need the specifics, you'll find out with a single search. He seemed to know that as well though. Kernighan for bit twiddling algos, that kind of thing. It's a bit strange to have someone non-technical interviewing a techie…

I knew all these answers too, because I was a developer in the 1990s. There is absolutely no purpose to knowing off the top of your head how long an ethernet address is, or even what system call will retrieve an inode (his bickering over stat() "filling in" rather than "returning" was bogus, for what it's worth). The top Google search result for each of these questions has the answer. Knowing these things isn't part…

He wouldn't need to know it for the job, but as others have said he probably would know it if he really had the experience on his resume. That's the value for me sometimes in questions like that, especially in an initial phone screen, to decipher if you're bullshitting or exaggerating your credentials.

Re: Google's “Director of Engineering” Hiring Test

#216

Post by lucb1e »

dekhn wrote: post #73
TheCapn wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The inode question gave me flashbacks to my interview with Amazon. They wanted me to explain what a hash function is. I kept giving answers for about 3 minutes explaining hashing, common algorithms, reasons to use it and places it applies. Recruiter: "I was looking for you to say it's a fingerprint " So I guess I was wrong, because despite explaining them in decent detail, I didn't use the one keyword.

only some hash functions are fingerprints. Other hash functions are the exact opposite of a fingerprint.

I know some hash functions are not meant to create unique fingerprints (they're to pick a bucket to put/look in), but what do you mean by the opposite of a fingerprint?

Re: Google's “Director of Engineering” Hiring Test

#217

Post by nickpsecurity »

tptacek wrote: post #52
lordnacho wrote: post #13

I'm amazed he knew things in such detail. I mean who would know just how long a MAC address is? Or what the actual SYN/ACK etc tcp flags are? You just need to know what they're used for, and if you need the specifics, you'll find out with a single search. He seemed to know that as well though. Kernighan for bit twiddling algos, that kind of thing. It's a bit strange to have someone non-technical interviewing a techie…

I knew all these answers too, because I was a developer in the 1990s. There is absolutely no purpose to knowing off the top of your head how long an ethernet address is, or even what system call will retrieve an inode (his bickering over stat() "filling in" rather than "returning" was bogus, for what it's worth). The top Google search result for each of these questions has the answer. Knowing these things isn't part…

"I knew all these answers too, because I was a developer in the 1990s."

I think you're onto something greater. Maybe Google should hire more smart people who were developing in the 1990's as they're a nice, middle ground between ambitious, young folks and the been-there-done-that greybeards. Them realizing such people already know all the shit they're trying to teach their developers might be way to sneak older people into these tech firms. Haha.

Re: Google's “Director of Engineering” Hiring Test

#218

Post by [deleted] »

DannyBee wrote: post #175
burkaman wrote: post #18

Is this common for higher level positions at Google? I've gotten a similar kind of phone screen, but for an entry level software engineer position, and getting a few "wrong" was not a big deal. It's just so they can avoid setting up a real interview with someone who doesn't know the basics. If the call actually went like this, it seems like you just hit a new/not very good recruiter.

"Is this common for higher level positions at Google?" No, and in fact, it's so far outside the norm i'm not even sure what to make of it. Like I said elsewhere, my best guess is that he was really being evaluated for a much lower level TL/M position in SRE or somewhere. (The detailed linux questions are usually a giveaway that SRE is involved)

[deleted]

Re: Google's “Director of Engineering” Hiring Test

#219

Post by WillPostForFood »

lordnacho wrote: post #13

I'm amazed he knew things in such detail. I mean who would know just how long a MAC address is? Or what the actual SYN/ACK etc tcp flags are? You just need to know what they're used for, and if you need the specifics, you'll find out with a single search. He seemed to know that as well though. Kernighan for bit twiddling algos, that kind of thing. It's a bit strange to have someone non-technical interviewing a techie…

I'm amazed people actually believe the account is accurate. The guy failed the interview, and goes to write a blog post to lash out at google (and try to mess up future interviews for them), So of course he write it to make him look good, and the questioner bad.

We will stop here because it's obvious that you don't have the necessary skills to write or review network applications. You should learn the Linux function calls, how the TCP/IP stack works, and what big-O means to eventually qualify if you are interviewed at a later time.

Come on Hacker News, I know you hate recruiters, but do you really think that happened?

Re: Google's “Director of Engineering” Hiring Test

#220

Post by joesmo »

"4. sort the time taken by: CPU register read, disk seek, context switch, system memory read. Me: CPU register read, system memory read, context switch, disk seek. Recruiter: right."

This is the exact question I got in a phone screen (although mine included CPU caches so was actually harder) for the lowest level SRE position at Google. That and the obvious lack of knowledge of their interviewer, who I'd expect to know these answers inside and out, point to Google lowering the bar extensively not only on their interviewing practices (where it certainly was never high as in quality) but on the actual quality of their hires. Any SRE could be Director of Engineering at Google, apparently, going by this test. I'd say that equates to not having a bar at all.

Post reply on HN