3 ms·

> "The problem with Google's interview methods is that they all select for a very specific type of programmer: heavily math oriented, deep knowledge of obscure

> "The problem with Google's interview methods is that they all select for a very specific type of programmer: heavily math oriented, deep knowledge of obscure Computer Science theory" I'd be marginally okay with it if the interviews actually selected for this sort of engineer! I've seen multiple people who fit this description to a T who flunked the process, hard. If the goal here is "pick the hyper-mathy, deep-CS types out of the crowd" I'd argue the process isn't even very good at that.

dboreham 10y ago
Off-topic pet peeve but why is "OK" now apparently spelled "okay" these days? (especially in bandwidth-limited situations such as SMS or IM). OK is not short for "Okay", OK?
- nl 10y ago
  It has always been an alternative spelling.
  - thaumasiotes 10y ago
    Not so; as you can see in my other comment's link, we can cite OK about 90 years before we can cite "okay", and more reliably than that we can cite the alternative spelling "okeh" to 1919, which establishes pretty well that "okay" was not standard then.
    - dijit 10y ago
      by talking about this you've wasted all the bandwidth your two bytes would have saved a year. As far as I understand this has been common vernacular since before my lifetime, I'm not usually one to welcome evolution of the base language but this one is before our lives we need to let it be.
- scott_s 10y ago
  I think "okay" looks better than "OK".
  - dboreham 10y ago
    But it is ...wrong. OK originated as an abbreviation so why spell out the pronunciation of the letters? Makes no sense to me.
    - thaumasiotes 10y ago
      Because the connection to a 180-year-old fad for misspelling "all correct" is so obscure and non-obvious that it was lost long ago? Do you think we should be capitalizing LASER, too?
- thaumasiotes 10y ago
  "These days"? It's been spelled that way for nearly 100 years. > Spelled out as okeh, 1919, by Woodrow Wilson, on assumption that it represented Choctaw okeh "it is so" (a theory which lacks historical documentation); this was ousted quickly by okay after the appearance of that form in 1929. http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=okay http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=okay
solipsism 10y ago
Having a high degree of false negatives doesn't mean the positive signal isn't reliable.

dboreham 10y ago

Off-topic pet peeve but why is "OK" now apparently spelled "okay" these days? (especially in bandwidth-limited situations such as SMS or IM). OK is not short for "Okay", OK?

nl 10y ago
It has always been an alternative spelling.
- thaumasiotes 10y ago
  Not so; as you can see in my other comment's link, we can cite OK about 90 years before we can cite "okay", and more reliably than that we can cite the alternative spelling "okeh" to 1919, which establishes pretty well that "okay" was not standard then.
  - dijit 10y ago
    by talking about this you've wasted all the bandwidth your two bytes would have saved a year. As far as I understand this has been common vernacular since before my lifetime, I'm not usually one to welcome evolution of the base language but this one is before our lives we need to let it be.
scott_s 10y ago
I think "okay" looks better than "OK".
- dboreham 10y ago
  But it is ...wrong. OK originated as an abbreviation so why spell out the pronunciation of the letters? Makes no sense to me.
  - thaumasiotes 10y ago
    Because the connection to a 180-year-old fad for misspelling "all correct" is so obscure and non-obvious that it was lost long ago? Do you think we should be capitalizing LASER, too?
thaumasiotes 10y ago
"These days"? It's been spelled that way for nearly 100 years. > Spelled out as okeh, 1919, by Woodrow Wilson, on assumption that it represented Choctaw okeh "it is so" (a theory which lacks historical documentation); this was ousted quickly by okay after the appearance of that form in 1929. http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=okay http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=okay

solipsism 10y ago

Having a high degree of false negatives doesn't mean the positive signal isn't reliable.