It saddens me slightly how far down the page your comment is, as that's exactly what's going on here. I've also (and also not at Google) had a hand in construct

It saddens me slightly how far down the page your comment is, as that's exactly what's going on here. I've also (and also not at Google) had a hand in constructing these. It's a nightmare on the hiring side, too. We tried very hard to tailor our questions such that the candidate — if they new the answer — would only give one exact answer. Ours included a download of sample data to operate on; one was a question along the lines of "count the number of lines in any .h files that contain the following pattern <human description of the patter>"; the answer ends up being a single integer. My experience has been — overwhelmingly — that recruiters hiring for technical positions are incredibly non-technical. This wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing, except for, as mentioned, the huge amount of winnowing required to just find candidate that are suitable to advance to a phone screen with an engineer. > There are a LOT of people out there who grossly inflate their competency. Exactly this.