4 ms·
> It is the "really hard" part that is criticized here, not the "algorithm" or "code something" part. Really? That's not how I read it. And when I asked OP, th
by fwdpropaganda 9y ago
> It is the "really hard" part that is criticized here, not the "algorithm" or "code something" part.
Really? That's not how I read it. And when I asked OP, that's not how he responded. The examples of questions that he said he would ask had been stripped of any algorithm-related questions, or any questions that involve coding.
- watwut 9y agoNeither serpix nor acroback answered again here, so it was someone else who responded.
- fwdpropaganda 9y agoI'm talking about serpix. When I asked him "if you don't thik that algorithm questions should be asked, then what should?" he replied with a list of pointless questions. Then you said "it's really hard bit that's being criticized here, not the algorithm bit." No, it's the algorithm bit that serpix was originally criticizing, as evidenced by the fact that when he replied to me he didn't include algorithm questions from the list of things that he would ask.