4 ms·

Does it really matter though? What if I solve problems by eating a piece of toast? There's really no way you can understand how someone else thinks in an hour

by mattm 9y ago

Does it really matter though? What if I solve problems by eating a piece of toast? There's really no way you can understand how someone else thinks in an hour. All you're really going to look for is "Does this person think the same way that I do?"

CobrastanJorji 9y ago
It matters a lot! If I could reduce your toast-based problem solving technique to something we could implement on silicon and gluten, imagine the applications! Also yes, hearing you reason also matters a lot. I need to see how you refine my lousy problem statement into a solvable problem. Do you make a lot of assumptions about the problem without noticing? Can you consider alternatives or do you get completely stuck on the first solution you encounter? Can you explain a technical idea to someone reasonably clearly and concisely? I don't need you to be like me, but if we can't brainstorm together about technical problems, we're going to have trouble working together as a team.
virgilp 9y ago
I concur - it does matter. I'm not looking for "thinks the same way that I do" - I'm looking for "thinks". And specifically, how. I want to see you evaluate & discard ideas. I want to know that you quickly identified the "brute force"solution and discarded it, rather than sitting there for 10 minutes, not knowing how to even start. You must realize, if the problem is hard, I don't even expect you to solve it. You're suspicious if you do. I don't have half an hour to sit on a single problem - that's not the purpose of the interview.
- twelve40 9y ago
  and that's what makes it ridiculous. In my whole career I have not been forced to vocalize hard problems on a whiteboard in one hour, getting judged for how good of a dog and pony show I put on with "evaluating and discarding ideas" on the fly, out loud, in an interrogation setup. This is so artificial. Not even close to how real teams work. My best ideas start to really form after thinking about a hard problem for days, including in off hours, background mode. Often I have to talk to many people, including non-programmers, to cover all angles of a hard problem. These "hard interview problems" that must be solved through some artificially staged contemplation really are useful for two reasons: * it's sadly the only way to quickly try to get a random reading of a person in a semi-standardized way while minimizing time commitment, kind of like fast food is the quickest way to fill oneself, and * people who pass these at least demonstrate that they can drill/memorize or otherwise prepare for a challenging activity, which takes time and discipline, which in general are desirable characteristics that's it, pretending like this in any way models real work or has any other benefits is not right.
  - virgilp 9y ago
    > This is so artificial. Right. It's an interview - artificial by definition, not meant to be perfect; in fact perfection in hiring (or in anything) is unachievable - we aim for the "good enough". > Often I have to talk to many people, including non-programmers, to cover all angles of a hard problem. Here we are - me and my colleague - there to answer questions, reflect on your thoughts, etc. Talk to us, that's exactly what I expect. Not just to give solutions, but to clarify the problem (for you and for us). Make us understand how you're looking at it - we'll also share our perspective and see if we can come up with something together. Is this really something that you don't see happening, in practice?
  - Double_a_92 9y ago
    That's why I think that interview challenges should be "easy". E.g. something like "Make a number guessing game." 1. It's easy enough so you can talk and explain while solving it. 2. It can show your ability to split problems into smaller subproblems. 3. It maybe filters people that just memorize a bunch of solutions, since it's open how exactly you solve it.
    - virgilp 9y ago
      Depends what you're testing for. If I'm testing for problem-solving skills, I will pick increasingly harder problems, until you can't solve them. I will judge you on how well you performed on the one you couldn't solve.
      - Double_a_92 9y ago
        The problem is that you can't just solve the hard problems (e.g. those from hackerrack) like that by just thinking about it for some time (it would probably need hours or days of research). You just have to learn and remember some obscure algorithm to solve them. That just filter for "unexperienced" people that have enough time to actually learn a lot of algorithms by heart. I.e. that would be fresh graduates. But then you could just look at their uni grades, if you want people who are good at learning.
- Scarblac 9y ago
  And the candidate has no way of knowing what you expect, he's just been given a problem to solve. One time I was rejected for not identifying and discarding some particularly stupid attempt at doing something (it involved assuming that it was safe to trust input coming to the server over HTTP), but I have explained to people not to do that so many times that I really don't consider doing things that way in the first place.
  - virgilp 9y ago
    That's why he can ask if he doesn't know what we expect. Silence is the worst option - we're there to form an impression on you (an accurate one, hopefully) - if you just sit there silently, it won't help us. (I actually ask the candidate to talk us through his thinking process if I see him sitting there; I start asking questions if he still refuses. I realize that it's an artificial setting, where many people feel pressure to "perform well" rather than just be themselves; unfortunately, I have found no better solution to hiring, that would make the interview unnecessary in all situations)
    - mattm 9y ago
      Please be comfortable and be yourself...but we'll have you vocalize your thought process even though this is something you never do while working, you have no experience doing and it makes it tougher to think while you're talking. If someone was a great coder but a mute, your process would weed them out.
      - virgilp 9y ago
        But why do you assume such extreme inflexibility? I actually interviewed a blind person, and believe me, I didn't write/draw stuff and expect him to be able to read it. Process is about the rule, not the exception. If you don't have killer credentials, and don't do well on the "whiteboard interview", what will happen is that we assume you might not handle pressure well/ are timid, and we'll give you a fairly consistent "homework" (e.g. "fix this Firefox bug, or at the very least analyze the root cause/ how it should be fixed. Send us a log of what you did to narrow down on the issue and on the solution"). If you don't have time to do that (which is possible)... yes, we may not hire you - but, please propose a better alternative if you have one, for I have not found it. I'd actually be very grateful if you can help me find a way to improve this process.

by mattm 9y ago

CobrastanJorji 9y ago

It matters a lot! If I could reduce your toast-based problem solving technique to something we could implement on silicon and gluten, imagine the applications! Also yes, hearing you reason also matters a lot. I need to see how you refine my lousy problem statement into a solvable problem. Do you make a lot of assumptions about the problem without noticing? Can you consider alternatives or do you get completely stuck on the first solution you encounter? Can you explain a technical idea to someone reasonably clearly and concisely? I don't need you to be like me, but if we can't brainstorm together about technical problems, we're going to have trouble working together as a team.

virgilp 9y ago

I concur - it does matter. I'm not looking for "thinks the same way that I do" - I'm looking for "thinks". And specifically, how. I want to see you evaluate & discard ideas. I want to know that you quickly identified the "brute force"solution and discarded it, rather than sitting there for 10 minutes, not knowing how to even start. You must realize, if the problem is hard, I don't even expect you to solve it. You're suspicious if you do. I don't have half an hour to sit on a single problem - that's not the purpose of the interview.

twelve40 9y ago
and that's what makes it ridiculous. In my whole career I have not been forced to vocalize hard problems on a whiteboard in one hour, getting judged for how good of a dog and pony show I put on with "evaluating and discarding ideas" on the fly, out loud, in an interrogation setup. This is so artificial. Not even close to how real teams work. My best ideas start to really form after thinking about a hard problem for days, including in off hours, background mode. Often I have to talk to many people, including non-programmers, to cover all angles of a hard problem. These "hard interview problems" that must be solved through some artificially staged contemplation really are useful for two reasons: * it's sadly the only way to quickly try to get a random reading of a person in a semi-standardized way while minimizing time commitment, kind of like fast food is the quickest way to fill oneself, and * people who pass these at least demonstrate that they can drill/memorize or otherwise prepare for a challenging activity, which takes time and discipline, which in general are desirable characteristics that's it, pretending like this in any way models real work or has any other benefits is not right.
- virgilp 9y ago
  > This is so artificial. Right. It's an interview - artificial by definition, not meant to be perfect; in fact perfection in hiring (or in anything) is unachievable - we aim for the "good enough". > Often I have to talk to many people, including non-programmers, to cover all angles of a hard problem. Here we are - me and my colleague - there to answer questions, reflect on your thoughts, etc. Talk to us, that's exactly what I expect. Not just to give solutions, but to clarify the problem (for you and for us). Make us understand how you're looking at it - we'll also share our perspective and see if we can come up with something together. Is this really something that you don't see happening, in practice?
- Double_a_92 9y ago
  That's why I think that interview challenges should be "easy". E.g. something like "Make a number guessing game." 1. It's easy enough so you can talk and explain while solving it. 2. It can show your ability to split problems into smaller subproblems. 3. It maybe filters people that just memorize a bunch of solutions, since it's open how exactly you solve it.
  - virgilp 9y ago
    Depends what you're testing for. If I'm testing for problem-solving skills, I will pick increasingly harder problems, until you can't solve them. I will judge you on how well you performed on the one you couldn't solve.
    - Double_a_92 9y ago
      The problem is that you can't just solve the hard problems (e.g. those from hackerrack) like that by just thinking about it for some time (it would probably need hours or days of research). You just have to learn and remember some obscure algorithm to solve them. That just filter for "unexperienced" people that have enough time to actually learn a lot of algorithms by heart. I.e. that would be fresh graduates. But then you could just look at their uni grades, if you want people who are good at learning.
Scarblac 9y ago
And the candidate has no way of knowing what you expect, he's just been given a problem to solve. One time I was rejected for not identifying and discarding some particularly stupid attempt at doing something (it involved assuming that it was safe to trust input coming to the server over HTTP), but I have explained to people not to do that so many times that I really don't consider doing things that way in the first place.
- virgilp 9y ago
  That's why he can ask if he doesn't know what we expect. Silence is the worst option - we're there to form an impression on you (an accurate one, hopefully) - if you just sit there silently, it won't help us. (I actually ask the candidate to talk us through his thinking process if I see him sitting there; I start asking questions if he still refuses. I realize that it's an artificial setting, where many people feel pressure to "perform well" rather than just be themselves; unfortunately, I have found no better solution to hiring, that would make the interview unnecessary in all situations)
  - mattm 9y ago
    Please be comfortable and be yourself...but we'll have you vocalize your thought process even though this is something you never do while working, you have no experience doing and it makes it tougher to think while you're talking. If someone was a great coder but a mute, your process would weed them out.
    - virgilp 9y ago
      But why do you assume such extreme inflexibility? I actually interviewed a blind person, and believe me, I didn't write/draw stuff and expect him to be able to read it. Process is about the rule, not the exception. If you don't have killer credentials, and don't do well on the "whiteboard interview", what will happen is that we assume you might not handle pressure well/ are timid, and we'll give you a fairly consistent "homework" (e.g. "fix this Firefox bug, or at the very least analyze the root cause/ how it should be fixed. Send us a log of what you did to narrow down on the issue and on the solution"). If you don't have time to do that (which is possible)... yes, we may not hire you - but, please propose a better alternative if you have one, for I have not found it. I'd actually be very grateful if you can help me find a way to improve this process.