4 ms·

>>Sure you can write a for loop to iterate over a data set, but will you fall on your face when that data set is petabytes in size? I understand what you are t

by kamaal 8y ago

>>Sure you can write a for loop to iterate over a data set, but will you fall on your face when that data set is petabytes in size? I understand what you are trying to say here. But how many candidates are capable of inventing path breaking algorithms in 45 minutes, just to crack a job interview? I guess only a countable people in the world could achieve a feat that amazing, where they could invent a totally new novel algorithms from the scratch in 45 minutes. If I'm not wrong the very people who invented these algorithms went through years of research to publish them. Now if you are not testing this, and just testing if the person knows an existing algorithm. Then really this a scaled version of testing the ability to memorize multiplication tables. There is nothing novel in merely knowing an algorithm. And you also have not tested a person's ability in inventing an algorithm either.

superice 8y ago
> There is nothing novel in merely knowing an algorithm. And you also have not tested a person's ability in inventing an algorithm either. The goal of this is too test whether the interviewee can recognize that this is a case to apply this algorithm in. It pattern recognition, not memorization, that is being tested here. Whether that is particularly useful is of course the million dollar question.
- kamaal 8y ago
  >>The goal of this is too test whether the interviewee can recognize that this is a case to apply this algorithm in. That's the easy part. Everyone knows if you have sort a large data set, then you partition it in someway. Searching a huge data set requires building a tree on some criteria before hand and eliminating whole branches at every node. Or that they have to use a graph algorithm to figure out shortest paths and cost associated with the paths. Or that if you face a situation where you recompute many results you memoize. Or that writing nested for loops is a very bad idea. These are easy things to spot. But they won't clear you in the interview if you don't get the mechanics right. Knowing BST helps in sorting doesn't cut it. They want you tell them how you would traverse across a tree in some 'level ordered' fashion. Or list different ways you could order a graph and list the exact heuristic. From here on this is pure memorization. There is huge difference between inventing a new framework of thought even at an abstract level, and knowing the precise mechanics of balancing a tree.
mlevental 8y ago
i don't understand why people do this. you're raging against a machine. do you think you're going to change this person's mind on how effective whiteboard questions are?
- kamaal 8y ago
  No, but it helps to highlight the pointlessness of these methods in hiring people for a real world project. I keep hearing, how startups use multiple online judge algorithm screening sessions, to filter and hire the best. But the candidates just can't do any real world work, because they are busy practicing interview questions for the next job they seek while they are in their current jobs. In other words you are optimizing to hire people who are good at clearing interviews, not doing their day job- Because they have to be bad enough at day jobs, as they have to be practicing these algo questions all day to clear your interviews.
  - mlevental 8y ago
    >No, but it helps to highlight the pointlessness of these methods in hiring people for a real world project. for whom? who is the intended audience of your response?

by kamaal 8y ago

superice 8y ago

> There is nothing novel in merely knowing an algorithm. And you also have not tested a person's ability in inventing an algorithm either. The goal of this is too test whether the interviewee can recognize that this is a case to apply this algorithm in. It pattern recognition, not memorization, that is being tested here. Whether that is particularly useful is of course the million dollar question.

kamaal 8y ago
>>The goal of this is too test whether the interviewee can recognize that this is a case to apply this algorithm in. That's the easy part. Everyone knows if you have sort a large data set, then you partition it in someway. Searching a huge data set requires building a tree on some criteria before hand and eliminating whole branches at every node. Or that they have to use a graph algorithm to figure out shortest paths and cost associated with the paths. Or that if you face a situation where you recompute many results you memoize. Or that writing nested for loops is a very bad idea. These are easy things to spot. But they won't clear you in the interview if you don't get the mechanics right. Knowing BST helps in sorting doesn't cut it. They want you tell them how you would traverse across a tree in some 'level ordered' fashion. Or list different ways you could order a graph and list the exact heuristic. From here on this is pure memorization. There is huge difference between inventing a new framework of thought even at an abstract level, and knowing the precise mechanics of balancing a tree.

mlevental 8y ago

i don't understand why people do this. you're raging against a machine. do you think you're going to change this person's mind on how effective whiteboard questions are?

kamaal 8y ago
No, but it helps to highlight the pointlessness of these methods in hiring people for a real world project. I keep hearing, how startups use multiple online judge algorithm screening sessions, to filter and hire the best. But the candidates just can't do any real world work, because they are busy practicing interview questions for the next job they seek while they are in their current jobs. In other words you are optimizing to hire people who are good at clearing interviews, not doing their day job- Because they have to be bad enough at day jobs, as they have to be practicing these algo questions all day to clear your interviews.
- mlevental 8y ago
  >No, but it helps to highlight the pointlessness of these methods in hiring people for a real world project. for whom? who is the intended audience of your response?