Live data from Hacker News

The dystopian world of software engineering interviews

jarednelsen.dev

601–610 of 851 posts

Re: The dystopian world of software engineering interviews

#601
post #491

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's hilarious, but I think you dodged a bullet. Imagine for a minute actually working there.

My (somewhat charitable) interpretation was that either: - The position had already been filled and they didn't want to bother fully informing me - Both my contact and the person who "reviewed" my submission just really didn't care at all about the process and/or felt their time was better spent writing code than doing hiring (both people were technical) For what it's worth, this was actually the second time I'd inte…

You need to be considered for sainthood, with how charitable you’re being here. It’s also possible for interviewers to just be wrong and incapable of seeing it, like the one who misjudged the runtime of code that I wrote and didn’t even have the toolbox to resolve such a disagreement.

https://www.reddit.com/r/cscareerquestions/comments/1ilh7o/w...

Re: The dystopian world of software engineering interviews

#602
post #378
post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hah! Reminds me of https://twitter.com/mxcl/status/608682016205344768 . Cynical answer though — Google does not want people like you. They don't want to hire entrepreneurs or inventors. They want people who can churn out code when given specific instructions, and that is what their interview process optimizes for.

I don’t think there’s any intention to it at all. Unless one takes extraordinary steps to examine what brings truly brings value, most people interview for clones of themselves. Or worse: their idealized self-image. Google started off with very mathy people, and highly competitive people, and interviewing this way has always worked for them, so why change? Some people have done internal studies showing how wildly cou…

Google gets so many applicants it's irrelevant how counterproductive the interview process is. It selects for people similar to the interviewers, but that matters little, since they can afford to say No to 99% of candidates because thousands will still apply.

What boggles my mind is to see the same type of "skill testing" whiteboard coding interviews at smaller companies and startups that pay far less and don't have golden handcuffs to offer.

I've been at Google for 8 years. If I went to one of these smaller companies to interview and they asked me to whiteboard a data structure or algorithm problem I'd just walk out. I'm not the best programmer in the world or particularly shit-hot, but I'm sure there are many that are that would do the same.

Companies copying this process are doing themselves a disservice.

Re: The dystopian world of software engineering interviews

#603
I have a poor opinion of the Google style job interview to the point where despite having worked at Google for 8 years and trained in the interview process twice I just won't give interviews... I don't like the idea of giving an interview that I wouldn't pass myself.

BUT...

Having recently been through an interview with a well-known open source software company where the third interview ended with a "No" based on what seemed like purely subjective factors with no skill-based or evidence based reasoning at all... I do now have a lot more sympathy for our process @ Google which at least requires a panel of people with calibrated scores, multiple interviews with copious note taking and documentation, etc.

It really is hard to find a middle ground, though.

Re: The dystopian world of software engineering interviews

#604

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google had the equivalent of etcd a long, long time ago.

Was it general and polished enough to get traction though? What’s its name?

Chubby. It was the product that inspired Zookeeper and all its various incarnations, including etcd.

Re: The dystopian world of software engineering interviews

#605

Sincere question: What are you all doing accepting these multi-hour, multi-day take away free consulting gigs? Say NO to this bullshit. Establish a deadline and clear guidelines and expectations: 1. I will not be doing any take away work at all. 2. You will explain how my GitHub repo, resumé, previous experience is insufficient to qualify me for the job in 100 words or more. 3. You will sign an NDA for whatever solut…

Some people need to find a job at some point. It's nice to have principles, but it's nicer to earn money.

Re: The dystopian world of software engineering interviews

#606

Sincere question: What are you all doing accepting these multi-hour, multi-day take away free consulting gigs? Say NO to this bullshit. Establish a deadline and clear guidelines and expectations: 1. I will not be doing any take away work at all. 2. You will explain how my GitHub repo, resumé, previous experience is insufficient to qualify me for the job in 100 words or more. 3. You will sign an NDA for whatever solut…

Definitely a solid way to avoid bad interviewing experiences.

Any interviewing experiences, really, but bad ones too.

Re: The dystopian world of software engineering interviews

#607

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many interviews involve asking the prospective hire if they know how to gather and define requirements?

This is implicit in a coding interview, though. I, the interviewer, take a couple of sentences to describe a problem. What next? Way too often, rather than ask more questions - gather and define requirements - a candidate will launch straight into solving a problem different from the one I am describing.

Requirements gathering in reality can often require more soft skills or political skills, which doesn’t seem to be the primary focus of these interviews. Which isn’t to say the skills you mention aren’t important.

Re: The dystopian world of software engineering interviews

#608
post #512
post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think there’s any intention to it at all. Unless one takes extraordinary steps to examine what brings truly brings value, most people interview for clones of themselves. Or worse: their idealized self-image. Google started off with very mathy people, and highly competitive people, and interviewing this way has always worked for them, so why change? Some people have done internal studies showing how wildly cou…

Steve Jobs had a theory about why this type of stuff becomes prevalent in the lifecycle of companies: https://www.businessinsider.com/steve-jobs-on-why-innovation... Sounds a lot like google here. Frankly though, I think there's something more fundamental about large organization as to why this sort of stuff happens (not just at companies). Perhaps it's the iron law of oligarchy, but corruption seems inevitable at sc…

> Very few innovative people seem able to reap or retain the most value of their work.

Once a company pays you, it's not your work, it's their work. They paid you fair and square.

IMHO a developer need to produce about 10x what's his paid as to cover for the company costs and profits. If one thinks that they can cover those 9 tenths in marketing, office space, infrastructure, admin and legal costs in a more efficient manner, they should quit and start their own company.

Re: The dystopian world of software engineering interviews

#609
post #45

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…

Around 1990 I had to do some interviewing and I used this kind of intentionally underspecified simple problem to weed people out. (It seemed radical at the time.) Did they realize the problem was underspecified? Did they try to elicit the underlying “why”? Did they collaborate with me to complete the spec? Were they able to restate the spec coherently? Could they articulate a workable implementation in some technology domain? Basic stuff. Interesting thing is that there were people who really didn't do very well, who we hired anyway, who went on to be reasonably productive and reliable developers. In retrospect I concluded the cognitive and social basis of their ability was incomprehensibly different from mine. But I'd still do those questions today.

Re: The dystopian world of software engineering interviews

#610

When my classmates were preparing interview coding questions, I was working on a mini TCP implementation and a toy kernel. AWS rejected me since I failed to write prefect code to traverse a tree in level order. Google did not even give me an interview since I told the campus recruiter I have not prepared for the coding questions. Then I ended up with an internship at CoreOS and created etcd. I am glad that they did n…

Two things.

The google interview process was not made to filter you out. It was made to guarantee that they will not make a mistake on hiring you. People with the capability to do those interview problems have a high chance of being good programmers. There are many people like you who can't do those problems but are still very good programmers. Google doesn't need to hire you, the whole interview process is optimized for preventing a bad hire rather than finding people like you who are good hires but can't interview.

Second, traversing a tree in level order is a trivial problem from the interview question perspective. It is more than likely that this question will NOT be given by the interviewer because it is too easy. The interview questions FAANG tends to give are a bit more novel. In fact the method in which you use to solve this problem and the problem itself is often just taught directly in school depending on the class you're in, meaning you don't need to practice interview questions to solve it because it's a basic topic.

The solution is called tree traversal using BFS. If you didn't know this, despite working on and creating things like etcd you will appear stupid because the question is just too basic. When I interview I am 100% expecting questions way harder than this... even on phone interviews. Additionally when I'm the interviewer this type of question is the lowest bar, I will fail someone who can't answer this question.

This is not to comment on your abilities. Rather it is to give you a dose of truth. I truly believe that there are many people like you who can program an entire kernel but can't even solve fibonacci recursively on a white board. Despite this I can't stop judging you based off of the white board question nor do I know how to confirm that you can write a kernel despite lack of ability to solve very very basic programming questions.

Post reply on HN