51–60 of 851 posts
In my personal experience, having interviewed dozens of candidates (data science), I believe that asking "easy" and "simple" questions is the most effective way to probe the problem-solving skills of a candidate. Fun and interesting solutions to easy questions are hallmarks of great individuals. The question would go like this: Suppose I have a column-oriented file and I want to print out a column in a reverse-sorted…
This, a million times.
I was told to practice solving dynamic programming problems to prepare for the interview[1]. Looking around the web I found out that people spending months solving thousands of dynamic programming problems, just for getting a job. This strongly reminds me of the rote learning I had to do in order to get into university, which includes thousands and thousands of integration, derivatives, series, lense placements etc... A nightmare I thought that ended decades ago.[2]
Now dp is all nice and cool, but I think most jobs don't involve solving dp problems on a daily basis. Just like most mechanics don't need to solve Lagrangian mechanics problems or civil engineer with continuous girder (the interview for those those two don't have those either)[3].
There must be a better way to measure problem solving ability of a candidate, isn't there? Something thay requires more dedication from the company instead of blindly followingbthe practices of Google.
[1] The position is EM at a offshore branch of a medium sized non IT company, way below the likes of Google.
[2] Typical Asian problem.
[3] I started as a mechanics, and then doing some civil engineering job, building bridge and such.
Is it possible to create a meaningful coding test that only takes 45 minutes? I would love some examples for front end tests if any one has any.
I've been doing initial phone screens (small companies) this week (two just today, actually), and with all of them when the recruiter (internal or external) gets to the "we'd like to send you a coding challenge" I interject with: "Let's do a code exchange. I'll point you at some of my GH projects, and you send me some of your code". So far they've accepted ("I'll forward it to the hiring manager"), and it's far too s…
Airtable requests a coding challenge and pays for your time. I was very impressed.
Comedian Daniel Tosh had a bit about people that claimed to be smart, it's just that they were just bad at taking tests. He said, "oh, so you struggle with the part where we find out what you actually know?" I hear a lot of complaints about the "typical" software engineering hiring process, and it usually comes from the people that don't do well within the current system. Could the process be improved? Almost certain…
If you think this has anything to do with incompetent people complaining, then you arent reading into the situation.
I will add that one can pass these interviews without extensive preparation, but it makes it alot harder when those around you are willing to spend ridiculous amounts of time studying.
Comedian Daniel Tosh had a bit about people that claimed to be smart, it's just that they were just bad at taking tests. He said, "oh, so you struggle with the part where we find out what you actually know?" I hear a lot of complaints about the "typical" software engineering hiring process, and it usually comes from the people that don't do well within the current system. Could the process be improved? Almost certain…
There's also a ton of opinion and taste involved in software engineering, which can bias the interviewer's view of someone's technical ability. Not to mention all the unconscious biases against people who don't "fit the description" of a typical software engineer demographically.
The Googles of the world limit their own potential by rejecting many talented people who couldn't make it through their hiring filter for reasons that have nothing to do with their actual ability to build software. Then they express angst over how difficult it is to fill positions. It's a self-inflicted problem, and a hard one to solve. It's probably impossible to design a theoretically perfectly fair hiring process without also solving all causes of inequality in society generally. But it can be made better and more fair than it is, and many companies and applicants aren't satisfied with the existing hiring processes, so they are making efforts to change the situation, as they should.
In addition to all of the very dystopian examples given in this post, there are other non-technical, super-dystopian things that have been popping up as "trends" in the tech industry. Ever heard of top-grading? It's the most oppressive interview technique of all time. A series of grueling multi-person interviews. A retrospective of all work experiences since high school . You also have to get multiple prior employers…
It's a recipee for fake.
In my personal experience, having interviewed dozens of candidates (data science), I believe that asking "easy" and "simple" questions is the most effective way to probe the problem-solving skills of a candidate. Fun and interesting solutions to easy questions are hallmarks of great individuals. The question would go like this: Suppose I have a column-oriented file and I want to print out a column in a reverse-sorted…
https://leetcode.com/problems/merge-k-sorted-lists/
https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/external-sorting/
and it's literally called "merge sorted files" (page 175 of elements of programming interviews).
In addition to all of the very dystopian examples given in this post, there are other non-technical, super-dystopian things that have been popping up as "trends" in the tech industry. Ever heard of top-grading? It's the most oppressive interview technique of all time. A series of grueling multi-person interviews. A retrospective of all work experiences since high school . You also have to get multiple prior employers…
Also other trends that, thankfully in my experience, have not yet made their way to tech. I suspect it is only a matter of time, though... A lot of non-technical positions I have seen and heard about (including non entry-level positions) require a video of the candidate to describe themselves and why they would be a good fit for the position. That just sounds awful to me.
Something that strikes me in reading articles like this, is the distopian part often seems to be thinking about this: p(job_capable | not_interview_capable) That is, it's crazy that an interview could miss so many people qualified for the job. However, I wonder if oftentimes companies are aiming for.. p(job_capable | interview_capable) If p(job_capable | interview_capable) is high, and p(interview_capable) is pretty…
Because the cost of hiring the wrong person is a LOT higher than missing out on the right one.