4 ms·

>the point is to see how people think i feel very strongly this is a disingenuous claim. clinical psychologists go to school for a long time to learn how to as

>the point is to see how people think i feel very strongly this is a disingenuous claim. clinical psychologists go to school for a long time to learn how to assess people's abilities to think. why should i believe that you a random software engineer have any competency whatsoever. in reality this is exactly the reason standardized exams (or standardized interviews such as leetcode style problems) exist - because average person can't accurately make that call.

enjoylife 7y ago
Upon completion of the interview the problem would indeed look like the result of the leetcode problem. However the take away from the op is in how the question has a narrative. It enables a dialogue over time. Each sub problem provides n ways of exploring a solution. Each problem providing a sounding board for the candidate to pronounce their thoughts. Such questions are effective at providing more signal(read as talking out loud) from candidates.
freethinker9 7y ago
> 'i feel very strongly this is a disingenuous claim.' ... > 'clinical psychologists go to school for a long time to learn how to assess people's abilities to think.' Is that really what you think? Here's the harsh, cold reality: psychologists are mostly quacks. The fact that you so strongly believe otherwise shows that your brainwashing runs deep. In reality, it's quite possible for awake and learned persons to study and understand the thinking of others. I do it every day. Case in point: > 'why should i believe that you a random software engineer have any competency whatsoever.' It seems you're one of those 'specialist' types, who is so much of a specialist that they actually believe being hyper-focused on one narrow thing to the complete and dimwitted exclusion of all else is the only possible mode of existence. God help you if you were ever to learn that there are actually other types of people out there in the world who in some cases know twice as much as you do about your given area of 'expertise' plus 1000x what you know of anything else. > 'in reality this is exactly the reason standardized exams (or standardized interviews such as leetcode style problems) exist - because average person can't accurately make that call.' Not everybody is average, dimwit. Especially the sort of people who are supposed to be interviewing top tier programmers. And not everybody is an autistic dweeb who can't understand other humans. Poker players have a saying: if you haven't figured out in the first 5 minutes who the mark is, then you're it. Get a clue, noob.

enjoylife 7y ago

Upon completion of the interview the problem would indeed look like the result of the leetcode problem. However the take away from the op is in how the question has a narrative. It enables a dialogue over time. Each sub problem provides n ways of exploring a solution. Each problem providing a sounding board for the candidate to pronounce their thoughts. Such questions are effective at providing more signal(read as talking out loud) from candidates.

freethinker9 7y ago

> 'i feel very strongly this is a disingenuous claim.' ... > 'clinical psychologists go to school for a long time to learn how to assess people's abilities to think.' Is that really what you think? Here's the harsh, cold reality: psychologists are mostly quacks. The fact that you so strongly believe otherwise shows that your brainwashing runs deep. In reality, it's quite possible for awake and learned persons to study and understand the thinking of others. I do it every day. Case in point: > 'why should i believe that you a random software engineer have any competency whatsoever.' It seems you're one of those 'specialist' types, who is so much of a specialist that they actually believe being hyper-focused on one narrow thing to the complete and dimwitted exclusion of all else is the only possible mode of existence. God help you if you were ever to learn that there are actually other types of people out there in the world who in some cases know twice as much as you do about your given area of 'expertise' plus 1000x what you know of anything else. > 'in reality this is exactly the reason standardized exams (or standardized interviews such as leetcode style problems) exist - because average person can't accurately make that call.' Not everybody is average, dimwit. Especially the sort of people who are supposed to be interviewing top tier programmers. And not everybody is an autistic dweeb who can't understand other humans. Poker players have a saying: if you haven't figured out in the first 5 minutes who the mark is, then you're it. Get a clue, noob.