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

How to Ace the Google Interview: Ultimate Guide

byte-by-byte.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–239 of 239 posts

Re: How to Ace the Google Interview: Ultimate Guide

#231

Post by bitL »

mattkrause wrote: post #198
bitL wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the term "Logo" stands on a perfect abstraction level that in reality could have meant "using turtle.py you programmed last week with turn, move etc. commands", don't you think? Do we need to be super-precise down to minutiae when discussing informal stuff? Moreover, it's on paper, so who cares what syntax is the pseudocode, it could be even Logo itself.

> Do we need to be super-precise down to minutiae? No, but we also don’t need to make up ridiculous lies, especially ones that aren’t particularly funny.

Alright then. Believe as you wish.

Re: How to Ace the Google Interview: Ultimate Guide

#232

Post by Fins »

estomagordo wrote: post #226
Fins wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Smart (in the usual understanding of smart), or good programmers (in the "can invert a binary tree on a whiteboard" sense)? These are two measures that are basically orthogonal.

As in very intelligent.

Is there any evidence of that? Google selects people based on entirely different criteria, and promotes them for moving a button in Gmail from an inconvenient location to an even less convenient one.

Re: How to Ace the Google Interview: Ultimate Guide

#233

Post by geofft »

ChrisCinelli wrote: post #219
geofft wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with your comment in general, but, I worry about the bias of "Bring your own laptop set up to be able to code and debug" - some perfectly qualified candidates don't have laptops. Some perfectly qualified candidates do have a laptop but don't code much at home, and the setup they're used to is their work machine or a school lab computer. We already have too much bias in favor of code-all-day-code-all-night can…

I did not write it for brevity. Some people live on their company's computer and when they leave they do not have one. Yes, I always add "there is a machine set up for you if you do not have one". That said the machine has a generic setup with most common editors but no plugins. But good engineers will probably have a script on a Github Gist or something like that will setup the machine as they want it. In general, a…

Yes, I figured you probably had a provision, just wanted to ask for the sake of people saying "This sounds like a good idea." I agree people with their own setup will have an edge, and that seems like a downside that you could argue is defensible. I just think that saying you have to have your own setup because we know people without their own setups won't pass is too far.

Re: How to Ace the Google Interview: Ultimate Guide

#234

Post by bitL »

retiredcoder wrote: post #195
bitL wrote: post #60

You can bypass the whole charade by knowing 2-3 people within Google that can provide "assurance" you are good enough. Whiteboard testing is for grunts/unknowns without network. Another way is to be a significant contributor to some popular open source project.

Sorry, but I’ll call BS here. I have a very solid network inside google (ex-coworkers from another FAANG job) and also from xooglers, at IC and management track. Even in my last interview failure (see my post here), the recruiter told me I had more than enough to support my application. Yet, an exec made the no-go call.

Ok, I know a person that was stopped at the founder's level ("no way that person could ever work here."). Pity a VP blocked you, such things can always happen both ways, regardless of your interview performance/likability.

Re: How to Ace the Google Interview: Ultimate Guide

#235

Post by estomagordo »

Fins wrote: post #232
estomagordo wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As in very intelligent.

Is there any evidence of that? Google selects people based on entirely different criteria, and promotes them for moving a button in Gmail from an inconvenient location to an even less convenient one.

I've met a dozen or so Google engineers over the years and am very confident as labelling them all as quite clearly very intelligent.

I'm surprised we're even having this conversation.

Re: How to Ace the Google Interview: Ultimate Guide

#236

Post by Fins »

estomagordo wrote: post #235
Fins wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there any evidence of that? Google selects people based on entirely different criteria, and promotes them for moving a button in Gmail from an inconvenient location to an even less convenient one.

I've met a dozen or so Google engineers over the years and am very confident as labelling them all as quite clearly very intelligent. I'm surprised we're even having this conversation.

Might depend on your definition of "intelligent" though. I've met quite a few, too, including friends and relatives. Sure, they better than average programmers, but general intelligence seems to be the same as in your general college educated population. Otherwise we'd be arguing that Damore (or, say, Altheide, if one has ideological preference for one or the other) are also "very intelligent".

Re: How to Ace the Google Interview: Ultimate Guide

#237

Post by lliamander »

Fins wrote: post #236
estomagordo wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've met a dozen or so Google engineers over the years and am very confident as labelling them all as quite clearly very intelligent. I'm surprised we're even having this conversation.

Might depend on your definition of "intelligent" though. I've met quite a few, too, including friends and relatives. Sure, they better than average programmers, but general intelligence seems to be the same as in your general college educated population. Otherwise we'd be arguing that Damore (or, say, Altheide, if one has ideological preference for one or the other) are also "very intelligent".

> Otherwise we'd be arguing that Damore (or, say, Altheide, if one has ideological preference for one or the other) are also "very intelligent".

That seems pretty likely.

Re: How to Ace the Google Interview: Ultimate Guide

#238

Post by Fins »

lliamander wrote: post #237
Fins wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Might depend on your definition of "intelligent" though. I've met quite a few, too, including friends and relatives. Sure, they better than average programmers, but general intelligence seems to be the same as in your general college educated population. Otherwise we'd be arguing that Damore (or, say, Altheide, if one has ideological preference for one or the other) are also "very intelligent".

> Otherwise we'd be arguing that Damore (or, say, Altheide, if one has ideological preference for one or the other) are also "very intelligent". That seems pretty likely.

I think you may be equating "good enough at programming to get hired by Google" with "generally intelligent". My point is that these are entirely different things.

Re: How to Ace the Google Interview: Ultimate Guide

#239

Post by lliamander »

Fins wrote: post #238
lliamander wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Otherwise we'd be arguing that Damore (or, say, Altheide, if one has ideological preference for one or the other) are also "very intelligent". That seems pretty likely.

I think you may be equating "good enough at programming to get hired by Google" with "generally intelligent". My point is that these are entirely different things.

Damore wasn't just "good enough at programming to get hired by Google". If you look at what team he was hired for, how he was recruited, and the fact that he was (reportedly) exceeding expectations suggests that he likely is quite intelligent.

> My point is that these are entirely different things.

Entirely? I'm sure that Google employs plenty of fools (as do all large corporations) but to suggest there is no correlation is preposterous on its face.

Post reply on HN