4 ms·

The reason why good programmers also fail technical interviews is because the algorithmic/coding questions are mostly random. You can be asked any of over 1000

The reason why good programmers also fail technical interviews is because the algorithmic/coding questions are mostly random. You can be asked any of over 1000 distinct questions, and if you haven't seen it before, almost no company will "reward" you by figuring it out on the spot. Instead they will compare you to another candidate that studied that question and gave a solution in the allotted time. It's completely random chance at this point. I have friend who solved 700-800 Leetcode questions and got offers from Google and Facebook. I recently did 100 LC questions and got destroyed in the interviews. They didn't care about communication skills, asking the right questions, etc, everyone including Google, Facebook, Netflix etc expects the correct answer at the end. It is what it is, and I accept it. It's stupid, it's not representative of how I work, and it's completely gamed at this point, but it's how Silicon Valley is hiring. There's no use in pretending I'm better than it, so it's just plain studying and leetcoding for 2 hours a night until I get a new job.

akhilcacharya 7y ago
With that said, there are lots of people that get offers like that without doing 800. (Most people I know have done like < 50 and some claim to have never done any!). I did ~240 and I still struggled when I did new grad interviews. Feels like an IQ test to me quite honestly.
- mav3rick 7y ago
  Not everyone is equally smart.
  - akhilcacharya 7y ago
    How exactly am I supposed to interpret that?
    - mav3rick 7y ago
      That it's not a given that you did 240 questions was a guarantee for you to pass these interviews. 1. Natural aptitude often separates people 2. There maybe people who are just good at DS and Algo or have done competitive programming that they don't need these questions. Either way it's not as straight forward as doing X or Y and getting in at Google FB is guaranteed.
      - akhilcacharya 7y ago
        Ah yes, I do agree that I’m just naturally inferior. Just to confirm that is what you’re trying to say, right? Genuinely would love to understand this POV.
innagadadavida 7y ago
One thing not many people realize is that this filters good candidates so they comply better with company culture (follow rules) and how determined they are. However one down side for the companies is that candidates are more likely to shop around and might have heavily overfit their learning to those LC questions but not solving novel problems.
esoterica 7y ago
Most of the interview problems can be solved easily in the allotted time without having seen the problem before. Developers just have a very highly inflated opinion of their own intelligence. If they can’t solve a problem that MUST mean no one else possibly can and the question must be intrinsically unfair.
- mavelikara 7y ago
  Algorithmics took many years to evolve in to the discipline it is now. If every question can be solved by intelligent people in 45m, why did it take this long for the discipline to evolve?
  - xenihn 7y ago
    A quick glance through their comment history indicates to me that the person you're responding to is not someone who works directly with code, and thus has no first-hand experience with the process under discussion in this thread.
acheron 7y ago
Or you could get a job in a place that isn’t a dystopian hellhole. The country is pretty big, you don’t actually have to work in California. Other places don’t do this.
- stjohnswarts 7y ago
  Exactly, I've called out a fellow coder on these lame-ass questions before. My technical questions are things we are doing, how do you approach a big software problem, and some fundamental language questions. My co-worker always pulls out these lame zinger questions like google and she and I always give different appraisals almost every time of interviewees. Too many time someone has answered her "zinger" but hadn't the slightly clues about the fundamentals of programming or what we are currently coding for.
- chrisseaton 7y ago
  Lots of people don't have the clout to just get a job wherever they want, and have to play the game as it is.
jliptzin 7y ago
Yea, early on in my career (right out of college) I interviewed at google and got stumped on a couple zingers, one I remember was not being able to identify all the use cases of the virtual keyword in C++. By no means did I put myself out as a C++ expert at the time. But getting turned down from Google probably turned out to be the best thing that happened to me.

akhilcacharya 7y ago

With that said, there are lots of people that get offers like that without doing 800. (Most people I know have done like < 50 and some claim to have never done any!). I did ~240 and I still struggled when I did new grad interviews. Feels like an IQ test to me quite honestly.

mav3rick 7y ago
Not everyone is equally smart.
- akhilcacharya 7y ago
  How exactly am I supposed to interpret that?
  - mav3rick 7y ago
    That it's not a given that you did 240 questions was a guarantee for you to pass these interviews. 1. Natural aptitude often separates people 2. There maybe people who are just good at DS and Algo or have done competitive programming that they don't need these questions. Either way it's not as straight forward as doing X or Y and getting in at Google FB is guaranteed.
    - akhilcacharya 7y ago
      Ah yes, I do agree that I’m just naturally inferior. Just to confirm that is what you’re trying to say, right? Genuinely would love to understand this POV.

innagadadavida 7y ago

One thing not many people realize is that this filters good candidates so they comply better with company culture (follow rules) and how determined they are. However one down side for the companies is that candidates are more likely to shop around and might have heavily overfit their learning to those LC questions but not solving novel problems.

esoterica 7y ago

Most of the interview problems can be solved easily in the allotted time without having seen the problem before. Developers just have a very highly inflated opinion of their own intelligence. If they can’t solve a problem that MUST mean no one else possibly can and the question must be intrinsically unfair.

mavelikara 7y ago
Algorithmics took many years to evolve in to the discipline it is now. If every question can be solved by intelligent people in 45m, why did it take this long for the discipline to evolve?
- xenihn 7y ago
  A quick glance through their comment history indicates to me that the person you're responding to is not someone who works directly with code, and thus has no first-hand experience with the process under discussion in this thread.

acheron 7y ago

Or you could get a job in a place that isn’t a dystopian hellhole. The country is pretty big, you don’t actually have to work in California. Other places don’t do this.

stjohnswarts 7y ago
Exactly, I've called out a fellow coder on these lame-ass questions before. My technical questions are things we are doing, how do you approach a big software problem, and some fundamental language questions. My co-worker always pulls out these lame zinger questions like google and she and I always give different appraisals almost every time of interviewees. Too many time someone has answered her "zinger" but hadn't the slightly clues about the fundamentals of programming or what we are currently coding for.
chrisseaton 7y ago
Lots of people don't have the clout to just get a job wherever they want, and have to play the game as it is.

jliptzin 7y ago

Yea, early on in my career (right out of college) I interviewed at google and got stumped on a couple zingers, one I remember was not being able to identify all the use cases of the virtual keyword in C++. By no means did I put myself out as a C++ expert at the time. But getting turned down from Google probably turned out to be the best thing that happened to me.