3 ms·
The problem is that the algorithmic interview is the gatekeeper. As you say, almost none of your actual job depends on knowing any of that material in any way.
by pjlegato 10y ago
The problem is that the algorithmic interview is the gatekeeper.
As you say, almost none of your actual job depends on knowing any of that material in any way. However, you aren't even getting in the door unless you know it all, which is indeed arbitrary and a waste of everyone's time and energy.
Thus, good engineers who didn't happen to study academic CS at Stanford or MIT must regrettably waste months of their lives self-studying CS trivia which they will never use again except at other interviews. Being good engineers, they have studied how the system works and taken the rational and necessary step to participate in it. That's why so much ink is spilled on it.
- falcolas 10y ago> aren't even getting in the door unless you know it all This is the key to only one (admittedly pretty) door, though. Are the benefits of getting through that particular door truly worth the cost? I think this question is even more important when so many other companies are now moving away from algorithmic interviewing techniques since they aren't Google.
- pjlegato 10y agoI've seen the reverse: many companies are adopting CS trivia style interviews just because Google does it. They figure Google is the best of the best in software, so you can't go wrong by adopting as many of their practices as possible for your own software firm.