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

Harder programming questions do a worse job of predicting outcomes

triplebyte.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 540 posts

Re: Harder programming questions do a worse job of predicting outcomes

#391

Post by hackits »

bottled_poe wrote: post #388
drblast wrote: post #273

Google recruiters call me a lot. I think I'd do a good if not stellar job working there. I've passed multiple FAANG interviews and been very successful as a senior developer. In my email I have an "interview prep packet" from them that essentially tells me to brush up on algorithms and read Cracking the Coding Interview to prepare for their interview process. I'm fairly happy in my job. If they offered more money or…

> I've made a career fixing a ton of horribly shitty, inefficient code that's been produced exclusively by people who pass these interviews. I love this comment.

Give them benefit of a doubt, you have no prior knowledge of the time/pressure constraint's and organization structure at the time they wrote the code.

I would say they probably made the decision like we all do when development work, that solving this n+1 or bubble sort, or api package doesn't have time in the budget.

Getting to market sometimes is more important to managers than optimal `correct` code, when the market isn't willing to pay for the services of `correct`.

Re: Harder programming questions do a worse job of predicting outcomes

#392

Post by pcwalton »

kyralis wrote: post #260
pcwalton wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Go search for "Knights on a Keypad" (a formerly-common Google interview question). Trying to imagine any situation in which the solution would be useful is harder than the problem itself.

If you're trying to find a situation where that exact solution is going to be useful, you're not thinking about the problem from the right perspective. Handled correctly, a problem like this answers several questions: 1) Can you correctly break down a problem like this into its components parts? 2) Can you recognize the overall class of problems that this falls into? 3) Can you transform this specific problem into th…

If it's true that this type of problem is relevant (I doubt it), then why not ask about a specific problem you've actually had to solve?

I don't do many interviews anymore, but I used to, and I had no short supply of problems that I actually had to solve in the course of my work that I could ask about. I don't think whiteboard interviewing is great in general, but if you're going to do it you can at least try to keep it relevant.

As a matter of fact, I did have to do memoization of graph traversals at least once for work (most programmers never have to do this), and I find that problem a lot more interesting (trait matching for Rust). I could easily give a talk about that problem. As for that interview question, though? I don't always do well with time pressure, and so I can't guarantee I'd be able to answer it to your satisfaction.

Re: Harder programming questions do a worse job of predicting outcomes

#393

Post by sershe »

arrrg wrote: post #313
wolfgke wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They have kids. Developing a sentient being is a higher priority and more difficult than developing React Redux. This is like saying: "I have a time-intense hobby that I prefer over working too much for you.".

I can see this sentence being an interesting Rorschach test. Either you think it’s quite sensible or utterly absurd. My own brain was even flip-flopping around for a bit before coming down on the utterly absurd side. I think the maybe reasonable counter-argument against your sentence would be that while you personally do not have to value something like raising kids above your work, others very well might and do and…

The gp actually just said what it said; in response to "They have kids. Developing a sentient being is a higher priority", that probably means "raising kids is just another hobby" - not a judgment of whether hobbies or a job should take priority. I.e. that him saying "developing a sentient being has higher priority..." is about the same as someone else saying "my creative hat-making has higher priority...". Sure, that may be true for many people. But given two otherwise roughly equivalent candidates with W>L and L>W priorities, why would a company choose the latter?

Re: Harder programming questions do a worse job of predicting outcomes

#395

Post by geebee »

cshg wrote: post #5

Specific examples of what classifies as a “hard” or “easy” interview question would be very helpful to have reference points and assess one’s own interview process.

I wish this comment were higher in the thread, because it's essential. I'm very interested in this finding from triple byte, but we have no guidelines for what hard and easy questions are.

I know these questions are part of triplebyte's product, so a full, repeatable study isn't in the cards. But if someone from triplebyte could just post a few examples of each, I'd be able to get a lot more out of this result.

Re: Harder programming questions do a worse job of predicting outcomes

#396

Post by pcwalton »

joshuamorton wrote: post #245
pcwalton wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Go search for "Knights on a Keypad" (a formerly-common Google interview question). Trying to imagine any situation in which the solution would be useful is harder than the problem itself.

You mean that you can't imagine when a memorized graph traversal would be useful? I find that hard to believe.

I have actually implemented memoized graph traversals for work (unlike most programmers). To begin with, I see no point in asking this when I could ask how to implement trait checking in Rust (what I had to use memoized graph traversals for), which a practitioner will find much more intuitive.

Moreover, memoized graph traversals don't get you full credit on this question. There's a dynamic programming solution, and in fact the ideal solution is one using matrix math, which is ludicrously divorced from anything most programmers would ever see.

Re: Harder programming questions do a worse job of predicting outcomes

#397

Post by selestify »

meko wrote: post #385
AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We convinced our parents to buy a computer because it would help our education when all we really wanted one for was playing computer games. Joke was on us though, because playing computer games at the time usually involved a lot of putzing around and figuring out how stuff worked, ultimately teaching us marketable skills.

I'm envious because my parents heavily restricted my computer use thinking it'd rot my brain or I'd get r*ped. They wanted me reading books, to become a lawyer or a doctor. I always had an affinity for technology. My folks meant well but I think not watering that seed has me in the middle of this lost life.

If it makes you feel any better, even many of those who had that seed watered still feel lost in life :)

Re: Harder programming questions do a worse job of predicting outcomes

#398

Post by cdoxsey »

esoterica wrote: post #257

Why do developers complain so much about hard interview questions that can be supposedly be gamed by studying to the test? Every high paying industry heavily engages in gatekeeping, because the number of people who want to make 400k/year is far larger than the number of 400k/year jobs available. The traditional forms of gatekeeping involve requiring that people have the right personal/familial connections, or have an…

A few reasons:

1. At least for me, I didn't know the game going in so I wasn't prepared for it. A lot of folks I interview don't either (though its becoming less common... almost everyone is somewhat prepared for it now), and I feel bad for them.

2. I feel like I'm a competent developer, but I'm not very good at the game, even when I practice and study a lot for it. I can barely eek through the process. And at least for me, I don't have a wide, general set of skills... I'm kind of only good at writing code, so when these artificial barriers are erected, I see future job prospects disappearing, and I don't really know what to do about it.

3. Perhaps it goes hand in hand with engineering, but I criticize absurdities an inefficiencies in business all the time. There's something particularly hypocritical about an industry which prides itself on meritocracy developing a process which not only fails to recognize qualified developers but often actively works against them.

4. I think we actually need more engineers. A lot more. Gatekeeping is preventing this from happening, leading to a general population wholly unequipped to understand and maintain the software that's taking over their lives. Programming should be a lot more like reading and a lot less like specialized medicine.

Re: Harder programming questions do a worse job of predicting outcomes

#399

Post by TrinaryWorksToo »

gonehome wrote: post #94
griffinkelly wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've worked with some folks who were decent engineers who originally didn't get offers from FANG companies because they blew the interview; they later studied their ass off on leetcode and got offers. This did not make them better engineers at all. Ultimately, its just studying for the test, very much like the ACT/SAT in high school. You can be great at taking tests but ultimately a terrible student or vice versa.

It feels very much like that to me which is why it’s strange there isn’t a Kaplan equivalent. There’s interview cake and leetcode, but I think people would pay $2k for a class that focuses on the questions and in person whiteboard practice. They could collect information about the interviews at the major companies and then use those to create the program. For payment could also help candidates negotiate and then take…

This is exactly what Outco.io does, and I highly recommend them for this purpose.

Re: Harder programming questions do a worse job of predicting outcomes

#400

Post by ex_amazon_sde »

warp_factor wrote: post #309
drblast wrote: post #273

Google recruiters call me a lot. I think I'd do a good if not stellar job working there. I've passed multiple FAANG interviews and been very successful as a senior developer. In my email I have an "interview prep packet" from them that essentially tells me to brush up on algorithms and read Cracking the Coding Interview to prepare for their interview process. I'm fairly happy in my job. If they offered more money or…

You wouldn't be a good fit for Google. With their algorithmic interviews that require college-grad level of studying, they filter for people that are ready to follow orders without complaining. That's who they want to hire at the end of the day: some coders that don't get too critical about their job and do what they are asked to do, even if it is repetitive, stupid and doesn't really make sense (such as re-studying…

> With their algorithmic interviews that require college-grad level of studying, they filter for people that are ready to follow orders without complaining.

Spot on. Certain companies ask silly question and to perform tedious exercises and, in the debrief, investigate if the candidate complained.

(disclaimer: I worked for Amazon and never seen this pattern in the company)

Post reply on HN