5 ms·

I once interviewed at Uber. I told them I was also interviewing at other companies, to see what was available. They told me this was not "the people they where

by TeeWEE 10y ago

I once interviewed at Uber. I told them I was also interviewing at other companies, to see what was available. They told me this was not "the people they where looking for". And it wouldn't be "OK" to say something like that in America. They where looking for people who really want to work at Uber. I got an assignment to build a linked-list in language of choice, with a test-suite. A weird assignment if you ask me. But i build it in Golang and submitted it a day later. After that I didn't get a reply for 3 weeks!! I then mailed them asking if they where going to check out my work. 2 days later I got a reply, it was OK to continue. At that point my interest for Uber was already gone. If they cant handle candidates well, the company would probably be chaotic inside too. I also don't like their arrogance. An old colleague of mine is working at Uber, and he says the working times are flexible, but more than 40 hours per week. And they have over 1000 microservices. And its normal to rewrite them often. To me that seems like a bad architecture.

masklinn 10y ago
> And they have over 1000 microservices. And its normally to rewrite them often. > To me that seems like a bad architecture. I don't know, the part about it being "normal to rewrite them often" is worrying, but having fleets of microservices managed like Erlang processes or supervision trees sounds interesting and possibly pretty good — assuming that's how they're architected, I've no idea about that. And rewriting a service might be less of an issue if each service is just a small processing loop.
- rejschaap 10y ago
  The idea about microservices is that they are small and self-contained. This makes them easy to rewrite completely. Now I wouldn't say it is the goal to rewrite them all the time, but it is not a bad sign if some of them get rewritten occasionally. Microservices are somewhat new and a lot of architecture and infrastructure is being built around it. Companies like Netflix and Uber take the lead in this. Susan Fowler wrote a book about this during her time at Uber, you can find it here: http://shop.oreilly.com/product/0636920053675.do http://shop.oreilly.com/product/0636920053675.do
  - mattmanser 10y ago
    I've been programming a while now and it definitely is a bad sign if you're rewriting any code often. Firstly, it takes a lot longer than just making the necessary change. It's a waste of time. But more fundamentally, I can understand getting it wrong the first time. Throwing what should have been a prototype up without rewriting it. Whatever. But how the hell did you get it so wrong the 2nd time? And the third time? And the 4th, etc., etc. Now I'm not afraid to do refactors, massive ones if needed. But there's a big cost to doing it. The big problem with constantly rewriting stuff is that you almost always introduce new bugs. Or you misunderstand the reason behind some of the edge cases and cut them out. Sounds like the actual problem here is classic NIH syndrome with new programmers coming in, not liking the old programmer's style and rewriting the whole thing.
    - HeroOfAges 10y ago
      Part of the appeal and one of the advantages a microservice architecture gives you is that you no longer have to do massive refactors. The services should be small, focused and easy to reason about. Part of me likes the idea of never having to deal with legacy code written 10 years ago in Java 6. Constant rewrites of the same microservice might raise a flag due to unnecessary churn, but I welcome this new era of "immutable" code.
    - kaspiCZ 10y ago
      Not trying to sound like a wise guy, but I can see another option: the state of the system is in flux, constantly trying to improve, finding new ways to do it, using new and updated technologies etc. On top of that, microservices are supposed to be self-contained, but they do depend on each other to some degree.
moonshinefe 10y ago
They actually got you to build a linked list from scratch? That's somewhat hilarious, considering you can get a book within 10 minutes that'll show you how to do it, not to mention unless you're a terrible programmer who reinvents the wheel and doesn't know how to google, that situation isn't realistic at all.
- UK-AL 10y ago
  Nearly every interview is not realistic at all. At least it's better than whiteboarding.
  - moonshinefe 10y ago
    Fair point, but I'd at least expect an original assignment to be submitted later that isn't like in thousands of data structure programming book out there. Well, maybe expect isn't the right word, but I'd never run my interviews with such trivial requests that don't reflect what the actual work will be (hopefully they aren't writing LLs from scratch, anyway).
    - holydude 10y ago
      Do you have an example what would you ask on an interview ? I am just curious.
      - moonshinefe 10y ago
        Sure. If it's say a web application, I'd invite them to install the framework(s) / libs used and to implement a basic feature that could actually be used in an application they'd be working on. Nothing super complicated, but something that wasn't "reinvent the wheel that's googled easily". I'm not aware of many major programming languages these days that are missing linked lists or similar data structs. I'd also pay them for their time, regardless if they got the job.
  - crdoconnor 10y ago
    The best interviews are those that make an attempt to be realistic rather than assuming correlation between ability and knowledge of some of the more rarely used textbook knowledge.
perryh2 10y ago
Your interview experience depends a lot on the recruiter that's working with you. And this applies to all companies. Although I didn't get an offer from them, my experience interviewing at Uber was extremely pleasant and I made sure to connect with the recruiter, now at another co., on LinkedIn. I told myself that I'd hire that recruiter if/whenever I started my own company. After passing the phone screen, I still remember that the recruiter working with me called me back within 10 mins after I hung up with the interviewer and got me an onsite scheduled immediately on the spot. I didn't hear back about the offer for a few days after my onsite interview, but I was able to get someone to call me up and deliver the bad news immediately after I pinged the recruiter.
- holydude 10y ago
  But the key here is first impression. It applies to you the same as it applies to them. Be it Google or FB or anyone else...these companies are nothing special.They create an illusion of an elitist club but in reality it's the same old bureaucracy / corporate bshit that awaits you anywhere else. Why should I bother and be religious about the company If I do not even know what I am getting my self into.
  - walterstucco 10y ago
    First impression is for marriage not for work. Most of the best coworkers I have ever had gave me a very bad first impression... Uber sucks for a lot of other reasons other than there is some creepy guy who can't handle relations with women or their recruiters are not people I would choose as bff.
    - holydude 10y ago
      Yeah sure but if the recruiter / hr acts like you are piece of meat and would become a mere grunt to keep the machinery running what should you do ? I mean you are either desperate and badly want to work for the company but why pretend ? It's not like in this era people stick to one company working there for a lifetime.
vaishaksuresh 10y ago
>They where looking for people who really want to work at Uber Unless they were looking specifically for you (TeeWEE) and not a random search on LinkedIn, it is very elitist of them to expect that. I cannot understand how so many companies and interviewers fail to realize that interviews are not a one way street. Interviewees should also be evaluating the company for a fit as much as the interviewer does.
- watwut 10y ago
  People who "really want to work at Uber" are easier to take advantage of. They will work for being able to say they work in cool company and will be willing to take lower salary and worst working conditions. (Being woken up often to quick fix broken things screams disorder and broken process. Being asked to do 80 hours of work in 40 hours time screams incompetent tech management.) IMO, all the jobs you are supposed to do out of passion tend to be like that (hello game development).
  - sethammons 10y ago
    > Being woken up often to quick fix broken things screams disorder and broken process. Why? Things break. Critical things act up. You patch it up and work towards automating the fix or fixing the problem during business hours. Maybe you are focusing on the "often" part? Depending on the stack you work with, I think often has a different meaning.
  - vaishaksuresh 10y ago
    I have never met anybody who really wanted to work for Uber. There are some companies that people really want to work for, example Google, Facebook etc depending on interests, but even then, it is usually not just the company but the pay, nature of work. perks etc. Most people enjoy interesting/boring work irrespective of the company. A person willing to work 80 hours at Uber will probably work 80 hours elsewhere too.
reacharavindh 10y ago
> not "the people they where looking for". > asking if they where going to check.. I think you're confused with the meanings of were and where. Were - plural of was Where - denoting a place. As in - where was this? I hope you take my comment in positive light. Not trying to be snarky. English is my second language and I appreciate being corrected when I make a mistake so I can learn.
Veratyr 10y ago
> I told them I was also interviewing at other companies, to see what was available. They told me this was not "the people they where looking for". And it wouldn't be "OK" to say something like that in America. In case you're not aware, it's totally normal to say that in America, particularly if you're a recent graduate. Your recruiter will need to know if you're expecting another offer or something like that, as competing offers can affect your schedule and compensation.
aanm1988 10y ago
> An old colleague of mine is working at Uber, and he says the working times are flexible, but more than 40 hours per week. And they have over 1000 microservices. And its normal to rewrite them often. To me that seems like a bad architecture. Maybe... probably. Red flag is "more than 40 hours". and yeah, I too have decided I have no time for companies who screw around during the recruiting process.

by TeeWEE 10y ago

masklinn 10y ago

> And they have over 1000 microservices. And its normally to rewrite them often. > To me that seems like a bad architecture. I don't know, the part about it being "normal to rewrite them often" is worrying, but having fleets of microservices managed like Erlang processes or supervision trees sounds interesting and possibly pretty good — assuming that's how they're architected, I've no idea about that. And rewriting a service might be less of an issue if each service is just a small processing loop.

rejschaap 10y ago
The idea about microservices is that they are small and self-contained. This makes them easy to rewrite completely. Now I wouldn't say it is the goal to rewrite them all the time, but it is not a bad sign if some of them get rewritten occasionally. Microservices are somewhat new and a lot of architecture and infrastructure is being built around it. Companies like Netflix and Uber take the lead in this. Susan Fowler wrote a book about this during her time at Uber, you can find it here: http://shop.oreilly.com/product/0636920053675.do http://shop.oreilly.com/product/0636920053675.do
- mattmanser 10y ago
  I've been programming a while now and it definitely is a bad sign if you're rewriting any code often. Firstly, it takes a lot longer than just making the necessary change. It's a waste of time. But more fundamentally, I can understand getting it wrong the first time. Throwing what should have been a prototype up without rewriting it. Whatever. But how the hell did you get it so wrong the 2nd time? And the third time? And the 4th, etc., etc. Now I'm not afraid to do refactors, massive ones if needed. But there's a big cost to doing it. The big problem with constantly rewriting stuff is that you almost always introduce new bugs. Or you misunderstand the reason behind some of the edge cases and cut them out. Sounds like the actual problem here is classic NIH syndrome with new programmers coming in, not liking the old programmer's style and rewriting the whole thing.
  - HeroOfAges 10y ago
    Part of the appeal and one of the advantages a microservice architecture gives you is that you no longer have to do massive refactors. The services should be small, focused and easy to reason about. Part of me likes the idea of never having to deal with legacy code written 10 years ago in Java 6. Constant rewrites of the same microservice might raise a flag due to unnecessary churn, but I welcome this new era of "immutable" code.
  - kaspiCZ 10y ago
    Not trying to sound like a wise guy, but I can see another option: the state of the system is in flux, constantly trying to improve, finding new ways to do it, using new and updated technologies etc. On top of that, microservices are supposed to be self-contained, but they do depend on each other to some degree.

moonshinefe 10y ago

They actually got you to build a linked list from scratch? That's somewhat hilarious, considering you can get a book within 10 minutes that'll show you how to do it, not to mention unless you're a terrible programmer who reinvents the wheel and doesn't know how to google, that situation isn't realistic at all.

UK-AL 10y ago
Nearly every interview is not realistic at all. At least it's better than whiteboarding.
- moonshinefe 10y ago
  Fair point, but I'd at least expect an original assignment to be submitted later that isn't like in thousands of data structure programming book out there. Well, maybe expect isn't the right word, but I'd never run my interviews with such trivial requests that don't reflect what the actual work will be (hopefully they aren't writing LLs from scratch, anyway).
  - holydude 10y ago
    Do you have an example what would you ask on an interview ? I am just curious.
    - moonshinefe 10y ago
      Sure. If it's say a web application, I'd invite them to install the framework(s) / libs used and to implement a basic feature that could actually be used in an application they'd be working on. Nothing super complicated, but something that wasn't "reinvent the wheel that's googled easily". I'm not aware of many major programming languages these days that are missing linked lists or similar data structs. I'd also pay them for their time, regardless if they got the job.
- crdoconnor 10y ago
  The best interviews are those that make an attempt to be realistic rather than assuming correlation between ability and knowledge of some of the more rarely used textbook knowledge.

perryh2 10y ago

Your interview experience depends a lot on the recruiter that's working with you. And this applies to all companies. Although I didn't get an offer from them, my experience interviewing at Uber was extremely pleasant and I made sure to connect with the recruiter, now at another co., on LinkedIn. I told myself that I'd hire that recruiter if/whenever I started my own company. After passing the phone screen, I still remember that the recruiter working with me called me back within 10 mins after I hung up with the interviewer and got me an onsite scheduled immediately on the spot. I didn't hear back about the offer for a few days after my onsite interview, but I was able to get someone to call me up and deliver the bad news immediately after I pinged the recruiter.

holydude 10y ago
But the key here is first impression. It applies to you the same as it applies to them. Be it Google or FB or anyone else...these companies are nothing special.They create an illusion of an elitist club but in reality it's the same old bureaucracy / corporate bshit that awaits you anywhere else. Why should I bother and be religious about the company If I do not even know what I am getting my self into.
- walterstucco 10y ago
  First impression is for marriage not for work. Most of the best coworkers I have ever had gave me a very bad first impression... Uber sucks for a lot of other reasons other than there is some creepy guy who can't handle relations with women or their recruiters are not people I would choose as bff.
  - holydude 10y ago
    Yeah sure but if the recruiter / hr acts like you are piece of meat and would become a mere grunt to keep the machinery running what should you do ? I mean you are either desperate and badly want to work for the company but why pretend ? It's not like in this era people stick to one company working there for a lifetime.

vaishaksuresh 10y ago

>They where looking for people who really want to work at Uber Unless they were looking specifically for you (TeeWEE) and not a random search on LinkedIn, it is very elitist of them to expect that. I cannot understand how so many companies and interviewers fail to realize that interviews are not a one way street. Interviewees should also be evaluating the company for a fit as much as the interviewer does.

watwut 10y ago
People who "really want to work at Uber" are easier to take advantage of. They will work for being able to say they work in cool company and will be willing to take lower salary and worst working conditions. (Being woken up often to quick fix broken things screams disorder and broken process. Being asked to do 80 hours of work in 40 hours time screams incompetent tech management.) IMO, all the jobs you are supposed to do out of passion tend to be like that (hello game development).
- sethammons 10y ago
  > Being woken up often to quick fix broken things screams disorder and broken process. Why? Things break. Critical things act up. You patch it up and work towards automating the fix or fixing the problem during business hours. Maybe you are focusing on the "often" part? Depending on the stack you work with, I think often has a different meaning.
- vaishaksuresh 10y ago
  I have never met anybody who really wanted to work for Uber. There are some companies that people really want to work for, example Google, Facebook etc depending on interests, but even then, it is usually not just the company but the pay, nature of work. perks etc. Most people enjoy interesting/boring work irrespective of the company. A person willing to work 80 hours at Uber will probably work 80 hours elsewhere too.

reacharavindh 10y ago

> not "the people they where looking for". > asking if they where going to check.. I think you're confused with the meanings of were and where. Were - plural of was Where - denoting a place. As in - where was this? I hope you take my comment in positive light. Not trying to be snarky. English is my second language and I appreciate being corrected when I make a mistake so I can learn.

Veratyr 10y ago

> I told them I was also interviewing at other companies, to see what was available. They told me this was not "the people they where looking for". And it wouldn't be "OK" to say something like that in America. In case you're not aware, it's totally normal to say that in America, particularly if you're a recent graduate. Your recruiter will need to know if you're expecting another offer or something like that, as competing offers can affect your schedule and compensation.

aanm1988 10y ago

> An old colleague of mine is working at Uber, and he says the working times are flexible, but more than 40 hours per week. And they have over 1000 microservices. And its normal to rewrite them often. To me that seems like a bad architecture. Maybe... probably. Red flag is "more than 40 hours". and yeah, I too have decided I have no time for companies who screw around during the recruiting process.