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

Google outage – resolved

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

841–850 of 870 posts

Re: Google outage – resolved

#841

Post by esyir »

BaiRado wrote: post #840
psully wrote: post #835

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funnily enough, this response is exactly what the parent seems to be talking about. FAANG originated as a stock term and not as a grouping of companies with similar hiring processes. i.e. Interviews at Netflix are generally domain specific. Likewise, Amazon isn't the same as Apple isn't the same as Google. > If you don't come up with a close-to-optimal solution in about 5 minutes Disingenuously hyperbolic. I was only…

Funnily enough, this response is exactly what someone who succeeded under this model would say. This all seems like nonsense coming from individuals who are (understandably or not) frustrated that others would suggest that their success was only due to an interview process that aligned with their strengths, rather than their obviously superior skill and intellect.

On the flipside, you can say something similar about your response regardless of your actual position.

What you've basically told him is: "Your experience is false, you're just biased and whatever your success was is a lie."

Re: Google outage – resolved

#842

Post by psully »

BaiRado wrote: post #840
psully wrote: post #835

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funnily enough, this response is exactly what the parent seems to be talking about. FAANG originated as a stock term and not as a grouping of companies with similar hiring processes. i.e. Interviews at Netflix are generally domain specific. Likewise, Amazon isn't the same as Apple isn't the same as Google. > If you don't come up with a close-to-optimal solution in about 5 minutes Disingenuously hyperbolic. I was only…

Funnily enough, this response is exactly what someone who succeeded under this model would say. This all seems like nonsense coming from individuals who are (understandably or not) frustrated that others would suggest that their success was only due to an interview process that aligned with their strengths, rather than their obviously superior skill and intellect.

I don't think I would be considered a "success" under this model as I never passed a tough interview and currently work at company you will never hear of. I simply have no desire to justify my skills by talking others down and pretending I'm too good for companies that reject me.

I'm not sure how this is a valid rebuttal to my comment since it addresses none of the point I made. Do you really think the secret sauce to getting into highly competitive jobs is by incoherently speed running through algorithm questions?

Re: Google outage – resolved

#843

Post by sitkack »

jjguy wrote: post #751
nickjj wrote: post #719

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This topic just came up recently on a podcast I was on where someone said a large service was down for X amount of time and the service being down tanked his entire business while it was down for days. But he was compensated in hosting credits for the exact amount of down time for the 1 service that caused the issue. It took so long to resolve because it took support a while to figure out it was their service, not hi…

I like your anecdote, I might steal that one. IANAL, but I negotiate a lot of enterprise SaaS agreements. When considering the SLA, it is important to remember it is a legal document, not an engineering one. It has engineering impact and is up to engineering to satisfy, but the actual contents of it are better considered when wearing your lawyer hat, not your engineering one. e.g., What you're referring to is related…

> Doesn't make much sense to sign up a client for $10k per year but accept $10M+ liability exposure for them.

Businesses do this all the time, this is how they make money. And they use a combination of insurance and not %@$#@*! up.

Re: Google outage – resolved

#844

Post by sitkack »

Maxion wrote: post #744
huijzer wrote: post #716

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed, and also it's worth noting that we're talking about companies here. Yes, for any individual the amount of money lost is insane, but that's the risk for the company. If one individual can accidentally nearly bankrupt the company, then the company did not have proper risk management in place. That isn't too say that it wouldn't also affect my sleep quality.

Sadly a lot of managers don't see it this way, they'd rather assign blame.

That is because they are managers, most got where they are by assigning rewards to themselves.

Re: Google outage – resolved

#845

Post by sitkack »

zentiggr wrote: post #721
qz2 wrote: post #681

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apart from the ones that they haven't worked out yet :)

When I meet the engineer who can design for the unknown unknowns, I will bow to them.

Formal methods for your formal methods. And never shipping on Friday.

Re: Google outage – resolved

#847

Post by ehsankia »

LdSGSgvupDV wrote: post #837
ehsankia wrote: post #829

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems like they claim around 45m https://techcrunch.com/2020/12/14/gmail-youtube-google-docs-...

Is this official announcement? I don't find any link to google in your posted url.

not an announcement, seems like just a statement. I assume an official statement will come with the post mortem blog post in the next few days.

Re: Google outage – resolved

#850

Post by reallydontask »

rococode wrote: post #817
mav3rick wrote: post #813

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay ? No one's discounting his achievements. What's wrong with knowing stuff about a binary tree ? Is ignorance a badge of honor now ?

Yeah, nothing wrong with not having memorized how to do that - it's certainly not often useful in practice. But if you're given the definitions and a couple minutes to figure it out (which, in an interview, you are), and you actually can't come up with the 10 lines of code to do it, maybe that question is working as intended after all...

> But if you're given the definitions and a couple minutes to figure it out (which, in an interview, you are), and you actually can't come up with the 10 lines of code to do it, maybe that question is working as intended after all...

or maybe the person struggles to work things out in an extremely stressful situation

I speak as somebody that finds interviews Extremely stressful and if working there is regularly my interview levels of stress then please do reject me.

Post reply on HN