I interviewed at six top companies in Silicon Valley in six days • Hacker News Board

Re: I interviewed at six top companies in Silicon Valley in six days

#241

Post by Zimahl » Fri, Jan 18, 2019, 10:50 PM UTC

markdoubleyou wrote: post #12

"After about a month of consistently practicing problems each day (maybe 2–3 hours/day, more on weekends)..." I'm reading this as a guy with a wife, kids, full-time job, and rusty whiteboarding skills. My inability to make this kind of time investment makes me feel trapped at my current position.

Why?

So you don't get to work at a big name tech company, big whoop. Go find one of the myriad of companies that are still doing great work, pay well, and where overtime isn't expected. There are literally thousands of them, you just won't get any name recognition from them.

Re: I interviewed at six top companies in Silicon Valley in six days

#242

Post by laumars » Fri, Jan 18, 2019, 10:50 PM UTC

guessmyname wrote: post #9

> If it’s of any use: I was interviewing for my second job out of college with about two and a half years of experience without any particularly notable internships or employers on my resume; I went to a very small school that had zero known software companies at their “career fair”; I started preparing in late April and started applying in June/July; and, lastly, a few months in, my job is everything I could have po…

I don't get some peoples fascination with working for FAANG anyway. As you said yourself, you've had some amazing jobs outside of FAANG. People seem to hold such prestige for working at a household named software house but that doesn't mean the work is going to be any more interesting than at any of the countless other technology companies out there that are on the bleeding edge.

Re: I interviewed at six top companies in Silicon Valley in six days

#243

Post by telotortium » Fri, Jan 18, 2019, 10:53 PM UTC

Johnny555 wrote: post #66

I was surprised that he got an offer from Google after a single interview during his 6 days of interviews - it took 3 months and several interviews before I got an offer from them. Turns out that he didn't: "It’s a very loooooong process relative to the rest of the companies I spoke with, so I definitely had to keep everyone updated on where Google was. I also had to let Google know where I was with everyone else."

Probably means a single on-site day (with 5 interviews). The hiring process can be slow for factors outside the candidate's control, due both to general coordination delays and the need to have a hiring committee evaluate the candidate after receiving interview scores.

Re: I interviewed at six top companies in Silicon Valley in six days

#244

Post by nfRfqX5n » Fri, Jan 18, 2019, 10:53 PM UTC

Johnny555 wrote: post #66

I was surprised that he got an offer from Google after a single interview during his 6 days of interviews - it took 3 months and several interviews before I got an offer from them. Turns out that he didn't: "It’s a very loooooong process relative to the rest of the companies I spoke with, so I definitely had to keep everyone updated on where Google was. I also had to let Google know where I was with everyone else."

most of these companies will give you a response relatively quickly if you tell them you are interviewing at other places or have other offers

Re: I interviewed at six top companies in Silicon Valley in six days

#245

Post by perl4ever » Fri, Jan 18, 2019, 10:53 PM UTC

Permit wrote: post #131

rachelbythebay wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Programmer distillation. Companies need to admit that only trying to hire a single type of person is not going to work. It's just like with petroleum: there's nothing wrong with the other products you get from the mix. You just have to appreciate what there is and make the most of it. I bet you're quite good at something (perhaps multiple things), but they don't value it. Their loss. I'm glad you found something that…

> Companies need to admit that only trying to hire a single type of person is not going to work. Why? It's not so clear to me that it's not working right now. These companies seem to be doing completely fine. If hiring programmers who aren't good at programming puzzles is a competitive edge, I would expect to see other companies hiring these programmers and succeeding. It seems more likely to me that there is (at mos…

"If hiring programmers who aren't good at programming puzzles is a competitive edge, I would expect to see other companies hiring these programmers and succeeding."

You're begging the question. Other companies do hire people who are excluded by a certain class of employer, and that's exactly why some get outraged by the types of quizzes that are used. The difference between the standards creates cognitive dissonance over one's ability and status. It's effectively a caste system, and it involves persistent blind spots about discrimination, whether towards protected classes or not.

I can't pass an Amazon or Google phone screen - both of them invited me to try, and they then made me feel very out of place. I'm not a software engineer per se and I didn't get my CS degree from a top school. Yet I have worked for a company that Google outsources important work to, proving I can do useful things that Google needs done and maybe isn't even able to do in house.

I don't go around raging against Google hiring who they want, partly because I'm probably better off not working there anyway. But I understand where people are coming from when they do get angry, even if it is the sign of an imperfect character.

From an employers point of view, they just want to grab the employees that are suitable for their goals and jettison the others. But from a potential employee's perspective, it seems like if I'm not good for one job at a company, I should be good for another. Rejection seems unreasonably total. If, by analogy, you deal in second hand cars, it's a reasonable business model to buy virtually any car so long as the price is right and you know who to sell it to. But not all businesses are run like that of course. It aggravates people that there is a narrow vision for who is useful.

Re: I interviewed at six top companies in Silicon Valley in six days

#246

Post by cmonfeat » Fri, Jan 18, 2019, 10:54 PM UTC

honkycat wrote: post #78

avitzurel wrote: post #8

I really dislike the fact that you need to study for weeks with specific questions that really have no hold in real life. I've been doing this for 16+ years and I have never asked the type of questions you encounter in these books. Not even once.

Getting a computer science degree from a fancy university would prepare you for these types of questions. They are a ( maybe unintentional ) dog-whistle for coming a wealthy background which means you will fit right into the cultures at these sorts of places. Learning to program takes a lot of privilege. Look up the stats for how many google SWE's do not have degrees / where they come from.

But doesn't this article specifically disprove that point? The author came from a non-fancy university and non-fancy internships. He prepared only using free or low cost materials (leetcode and books) and was able to meet the hiring bar.

To me this reads that the questions are intended to narrow the candidate pool down to people with an abundance of time to devote to studying, which is certainly one type of privilege, but is not necessarily the same as a wealthy background.

Re: I interviewed at six top companies in Silicon Valley in six days

#247

Post by telotortium » Fri, Jan 18, 2019, 10:54 PM UTC

lozaning wrote: post #47

azhenley wrote: post #7

The heart rate info that he provides for the onsite interviews is a funny and interesting thing to include (around 100-122 during interviews, with a resting of 60). Does an elevated heart rate during an interview count towards one's daily fitness goals? :)

I started an 'exercise' on my fitbit right before my last onsight started. Fitbit claimed that I burned ~6K calories that day. My 3 week running average is somewhere around 4K.

4K daily average? What do you do, pull sleds all day when you're not working?

Re: I interviewed at six top companies in Silicon Valley in six days

#248

Post by blub » Fri, Jan 18, 2019, 10:55 PM UTC

m0zg wrote: post #137

ForrestN wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you do some quick research, you'll find that the harmful nature of Facebook is the subject of a vast public discourse in the United States and Europe. Lots of academics and public health professionals continue to research the negative consequences of facebook use. It's not an opinion, but I suppose it could still be considered a subject of some controversy. The best evidence I've seen, and that the commentators I…

Facebook's only real "fault" is that the "wrong" person got elected president in the US. The rest is just a politically motivated pile-on with tenuous evidence IMO, which wouldn't even be a subject of "vast public discourse" if someone else won. >> negative consequences of facebook use Do those "academics" also research the positive consequences as well? I'm in touch with my high school and university friends to this…

You seem to very creative in coming up with flimsy excuses for facebook :)

Which other fault-free organizations can claim to have settled with the FTC for privacy abuses, had their CEO forced to testify in front of the US congress and be questioned in a case of election manipulation, facilitated genocide, purposefully manipulated people into feeling depressed and many others?

There's an entire book written about the tremendous negative effects of companies like facebook on society - surveilance capitalism.

When comparing all of the above with the benefit of allowing various average joes to stay in touch with their family, which can very well be done over e-mail, phone, or any of the gazillion other social networks, it makes the latter mean precisely nothing.

At this point facebook would have to literally cure cancer for them to make up for their negative effects.

Re: I interviewed at six top companies in Silicon Valley in six days

#249

Post by TheOtherHobbes » Fri, Jan 18, 2019, 10:55 PM UTC

m0zg wrote: post #158

ForrestN wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I encourage you to read the essay, and then also imagine your last paragraph with "cigarettes" instead of "FB."

Why would anyone read the essay titled "The case against Facebook" and hope to get a balanced view?

It's a strange assumption that a "balanced view" can't possibly be critical.

Re: I interviewed at six top companies in Silicon Valley in six days

#250

Post by bradlys » Fri, Jan 18, 2019, 10:56 PM UTC

Zimahl wrote: post #241

markdoubleyou wrote: post #12

"After about a month of consistently practicing problems each day (maybe 2–3 hours/day, more on weekends)..." I'm reading this as a guy with a wife, kids, full-time job, and rusty whiteboarding skills. My inability to make this kind of time investment makes me feel trapped at my current position.

Why? So you don't get to work at a big name tech company, big whoop. Go find one of the myriad of companies that are still doing great work, pay well, and where overtime isn't expected. There are literally thousands of them, you just won't get any name recognition from them.

You're unlikely to hit $300-400k+ TC at those though.

Pay is a huge reason why people join them. The pay scale is completely different and (practically) necessary to compete in the bay area housing market. Checkout levels.fyi.