The dystopian world of software engineering interviews • Hacker News Board

Re: The dystopian world of software engineering interviews

#751

Post by mattrp » Sun, Feb 16, 2020, 6:41 AM UTC

BubRoss wrote: post #732

mattrp wrote: post #721

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m guess that’s the reason they never got back to him.

Right, you said that, but why would they assume some random third person tracked down the dependency?

Good grief man... I’m saying they assumed the candidate phoned a friend for the answer and then fed it back as his own to save his application. I honestly have no idea what happened, no one does... but generally there are no do overs and that kind of sucks given he figured out why they weren’t able to run his code.

Re: The dystopian world of software engineering interviews

#752

Post by rumanator » Sun, Feb 16, 2020, 6:58 AM UTC

ideal0227 wrote: post #90

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…

> AWS rejected me since I failed to write prefect code to traverse a tree in level order.

I hate to break it to you, but Amazon doesn't reject a candidate because he bombed his coding challenge. I know people who received a job offer from Amazon for a developer position although they somewhat bombed their hard skills component. If you were rejected after passing the coding challenge and phone screening interview then odds are you actually bombed their personality and/or soft skills aspect of their interview process.

Re: The dystopian world of software engineering interviews

#753

Post by tybit » Sun, Feb 16, 2020, 7:35 AM UTC

blaufast wrote: post #594

EpicEng wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow. I don't have as prolific a tale as that, but I'm in the looking stage right now and the idea of cramming for a test I haven't taken in 12 years annoys the hell out of me. I've done some pretty interesting things in biotech in my career, things that required learning about motion control, digital imaging, signal processing, and biology... but if I want a job as a web dev I apparently need to memorize how to imple…

Having worked at cutting edge biotech,startups and FAANG I wholeheartedly defend the interview process, and believe you would too if you ever switched over for a while

I got a job at a FAANG and still think the interviewing is absurd, and Im forced to work with worse people because of it.

No need to imply the OP doesn’t get it just because they’re on the outside of it.

Re: The dystopian world of software engineering interviews

#754

Post by anticensorship » Sun, Feb 16, 2020, 9:01 AM UTC

crimsonalucard wrote: post #739

kortilla wrote: post #737

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s incorrect. An interview process with true negatives doesn’t mean it isn’t loaded with tons of other false positives. Being good at leetcode has no relation to engineering skills, despite it being a skill in itself.

Where in my comment do I talk about leetcode or false positives? Not only are you incorrect, but you are completely off topic. I am saying Gayle Lackman, the author of Cracking the coding interview and, in the past, one of the board members who decide on candidates in the google interview literally told me word for word that the interview optimizes for IQ. Meaning that there are tons of engineers who can spend a life…

Ironically, the people who are truly of the highest intelligence and skill level would never choose to work at a place like that. So it's fair to say that what they are actually selecting for are people who are smart, but not too smart. Just like cops, really.

Re: The dystopian world of software engineering interviews

#755

Post by anticensorship » Sun, Feb 16, 2020, 9:05 AM UTC

rumanator wrote: post #752

ideal0227 wrote: post #90

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…

> AWS rejected me since I failed to write prefect code to traverse a tree in level order. I hate to break it to you, but Amazon doesn't reject a candidate because he bombed his coding challenge. I know people who received a job offer from Amazon for a developer position although they somewhat bombed their hard skills component. If you were rejected after passing the coding challenge and phone screening interview then…

[Thinking to themselves:] "Is this serf really the right kind of drone, the type who will fit neatly--much like an unthinking cog--into our organizational machinery?"

Maybe he accidentally let it slip that he thought the South should have won and Robert E. Lee had some good ideas.

Re: The dystopian world of software engineering interviews

#756

Post by anticensorship » Sun, Feb 16, 2020, 9:15 AM UTC

crimsonalucard wrote: post #610

ideal0227 wrote: post #90

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…

> '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.'

You phrased this as two parts, but in reality these two things are intricately linked. It's because you don't know how to judge person on their true ability--i.e. that you lack this skill--that you resort to useless trivialities like this whiteboard bullshit.

Combine survivorship bias (you were subjected to it and made it, so that validates the process) with heavy hive mind group think (We're All Real Smart People, Much Smarter Than Them Masses(TM))--both of which are always in abundance in intelligence-owned front 'companies' like Google, and of course you end up in your present mindset: arrogantly and naively selecting for people exactly like yourself; people who think just enough into things to think you possess a clue, while in reality, being totally oblivious to larger thoughts and concepts.

There are many in this world who just can't stop judging you based on your shortcomings and limitations. For example: your owners.

Re: The dystopian world of software engineering interviews

#757

Post by blub » Sun, Feb 16, 2020, 9:18 AM UTC

busterarm wrote: post #724

blub wrote: post #701

Earlier quoted context omitted.

" Functional style though, broken out into 1-3 line functions that only do one thing -- similar to what you'd expect from a Rubyist." I'm pretty laid back generally and I'm willing to overlook many things, but I think this is one of those where I'd vote against hiring, since I'd never want to maintain such code. Following the logic of algorithms would be for instance really hard because of having to jump around all t…

That's not how that works out in practice though. When each function does one thing, the cognitive load is low and you name things appropriately that make understanding each function on its own easy. You can scan an area of code quickly and find problems without having to build the whole house again in your brain. It's much clearer when you hit some unintended edge case then having to maintain a mental model of a hug…

You're talking about something different now though: initially you were mentioning functions that are 1-3 lines in size, but now you're describing functions which do one thing, without talking about the size at all. I was very specifically criticizing tiny functions. There are two big issues with such functions:

* the overhead in LoC of declaring and defining the function is between 30-100% of the function body!

* like I previously said following even simple logic becomes an exercise in jumping around the code. Never mind the whole house, even a simple loop barely fits into a 1-3 lines function.

Re: The dystopian world of software engineering interviews

#758

Post by blub » Sun, Feb 16, 2020, 9:22 AM UTC

aercolino wrote: post #722

blub wrote: post #701

Earlier quoted context omitted.

" Functional style though, broken out into 1-3 line functions that only do one thing -- similar to what you'd expect from a Rubyist." I'm pretty laid back generally and I'm willing to overlook many things, but I think this is one of those where I'd vote against hiring, since I'd never want to maintain such code. Following the logic of algorithms would be for instance really hard because of having to jump around all t…

Yes, spaghetti-code is much better! /s > Following the logic That's what names are for. I prefer to find _afterLeft_ spread all over the place rather than `x2 This spaghetti line: `x2<=x1&&x1+w1<=x2+w2&&y2<=y1&&y1+h1<=y2+h2`, in my opinion, is much harder than `inside`.

x2 <= x1 is actually a one liner which could arguably be transformed into a one line function. OP was talking about splitting an entire program into 1-3 line functions, or at least that's how their sentence reads to me.

Re: The dystopian world of software engineering interviews

#759

Post by anticensorship » Sun, Feb 16, 2020, 9:24 AM UTC

crimsonalucard wrote: post #668

ideal0227 wrote: post #655

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for educating me about BFS. I am major in computer science, and published paper in top conference. Tree traversal is trivial for me. So I guess I have decent CS background and knowledge? Writing bug free and perfect code is not equal to simply solve the problem. If you have prepared coding interviews (especially for new grad and internship), you should understand it is less about knowledge but more about pract…

A published paper in a top conference only happens through political connections in undergrad it is not a marker for your IQ which is what a company like google tests for. The interview is not just about writing bug free code it is 100% about solving a problem you haven't seen before. Google specifically tells their interviewers to avoid "canned" problems that are already all over the internet. >If the interview is k…

> 'A published paper in a top conference only happens through political connections in undergrad'

Which fact in and of itself ought to show just how rigged the whole system is--when people can get papers published in prestigious journals merely on the strength of "whom they know."

Re: The dystopian world of software engineering interviews

#760

Post by pandaman » Sun, Feb 16, 2020, 9:30 AM UTC

cmrdporcupine wrote: post #602

neilk wrote: 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…

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…

>Google gets so many applicants it's irrelevant how counterproductive the interview process is.

It still may be relevant when you are looking for a specific domain knowledge instead of a generic "programmer". A great example is Amazon Game Studios. They employ the general Amazon hiring process from what I understand yet, as a game studio, it's a complete and utter failure. There are just few thousand experienced game programmers in the whole world and only a fraction of them wants to apply at Amazon at all for different reasons. You cull 99% of them and you are left with inexperienced people who will not be able to learn anything since there is nobody to learn from. Even if few experienced people got through or went around hiring process (e.g. celebrity programmers hired without whiteboarding) they will be in a minority and unable to mentor the rest of the studio. Google and Facebook are spinning up their own game studios and I expect the same result from them.