4 ms·

While I agree with your sentiment about cultural bias, I don't necessarily feel that the red book thing is all that relevant. I live in Europe and I've heard of

While I agree with your sentiment about cultural bias, I don't necessarily feel that the red book thing is all that relevant. I live in Europe and I've heard of (and consequently read) the 'red book', though I wouldn't have necessarily called it that.

slavik81 8y ago
Indeed. The OpenGL Programming Guide[1] has been the "Red Book" since it was published in 1997. Everybody knows about the Red Book. More seriously, I have no idea what book you're talking about. Whatever it is you're referring to, it was not the textbook used when I took Data Structures and Algorithms in undergrad (EE), nor when I TA'd the course while doing my master's (CS, Graphics) at another university. It feels a little arbitrary. As an EE, I took many classes on the fundamental design and construction of computers and communication networks. That knowledge has been very useful in understanding how my software interacts with the world. I will be the first to admit that my knowledge of trees, graphs and other data structures are weaker than those who spent many courses on them. But the company needs a broad assortment of skills to succeed, so it seems like a bad idea to base hiring heavily on finding people that all have the same talents as the interviewer. Of course, if I need to conform to that mold to pass the interview, that's what I'll do. [1]: http://www.opengl-redbook.com/ http://www.opengl-redbook.com/
- TechieKid 8y ago
  Please be more sensitive about declaring something you know 'everyone knows.' Especially when in the same breath you admit to not knowing what red book parent and grandparent are talking about. While I don't match the example, folks born in 1997 when the book came out are just about graduating college in a couple of years, and expecting everyone to know all the nooks and crannies of computer science is not at all feasible. Relevant XKCD: https://www.xkcd.com/1053/ https://www.xkcd.com/1053/
  - syrrim 8y ago
    It's possible GP was trying to make a joke. One signifier of this is that he follows with "more seriously", suggesting what came before was less serious. You should be more sensitive before suggesting that someone isn't making a joke.
  - slavik81 8y ago
    That's exactly the point I was trying to make. I agree entirely.
- jplayer01 8y ago
  It's hard to glean from the information given whether the Googler was so intent in the red book (Skiena, Algorithm Design Manual) that he required interviewees to be able to quote verbatim or just expected a certain knowledge of algorithms (for which a number of books would suffice, but Skiena really is a great resource for).

slavik81 8y ago

Indeed. The OpenGL Programming Guide[1] has been the "Red Book" since it was published in 1997. Everybody knows about the Red Book. More seriously, I have no idea what book you're talking about. Whatever it is you're referring to, it was not the textbook used when I took Data Structures and Algorithms in undergrad (EE), nor when I TA'd the course while doing my master's (CS, Graphics) at another university. It feels a little arbitrary. As an EE, I took many classes on the fundamental design and construction of computers and communication networks. That knowledge has been very useful in understanding how my software interacts with the world. I will be the first to admit that my knowledge of trees, graphs and other data structures are weaker than those who spent many courses on them. But the company needs a broad assortment of skills to succeed, so it seems like a bad idea to base hiring heavily on finding people that all have the same talents as the interviewer. Of course, if I need to conform to that mold to pass the interview, that's what I'll do. [1]: http://www.opengl-redbook.com/ http://www.opengl-redbook.com/

TechieKid 8y ago
Please be more sensitive about declaring something you know 'everyone knows.' Especially when in the same breath you admit to not knowing what red book parent and grandparent are talking about. While I don't match the example, folks born in 1997 when the book came out are just about graduating college in a couple of years, and expecting everyone to know all the nooks and crannies of computer science is not at all feasible. Relevant XKCD: https://www.xkcd.com/1053/ https://www.xkcd.com/1053/
- syrrim 8y ago
  It's possible GP was trying to make a joke. One signifier of this is that he follows with "more seriously", suggesting what came before was less serious. You should be more sensitive before suggesting that someone isn't making a joke.
- slavik81 8y ago
  That's exactly the point I was trying to make. I agree entirely.
jplayer01 8y ago
It's hard to glean from the information given whether the Googler was so intent in the red book (Skiena, Algorithm Design Manual) that he required interviewees to be able to quote verbatim or just expected a certain knowledge of algorithms (for which a number of books would suffice, but Skiena really is a great resource for).