6 ms·

On the other hand, when someone expresses an opinion like this, you never know if they were contacted at some point by a Google recruiter and ended up with a ca

On the other hand, when someone expresses an opinion like this, you never know if they were contacted at some point by a Google recruiter and ended up with a case of sour grapes. I had a phone conversation with a hiring manager once, and obviously I was not the right type or class or caste or something, but it wasn't a technical screen at all, so it's a mystery to me forever what exactly determined the "in group" as you put it. As such, I know I'm biased towards them, but I can't really assess the overall company.

lowiqengineer 6y ago
Of course. I'm well aware that I'm considered mentally defective (or maybe just garden variety low IQ) by the hiring committee. That doesn't really change my observation here.
- albacur 6y ago
  You pop up in every post about Google or Facebook and make the conversation about yourself, wallowing in self pity because you didn't land a job there straight out of college. This might sound harsh, but you need to get over it and move on.
  - typest 6y ago
    ^^ what this guy said. You named yourself lowiqengineer because your SAT score was “only” 2200. That’s in the 98th percentile —- if it were an IQ test, it would get you into Mensa, the organization for high IQ people! You talk as if people from FANG (your invented acronym to exclude Amazon) look down on all others, but it seems that you are the one looking down on all others, everyone who wasn’t lucky enough to get into G/FB straight out of college while also building up not just 1, but 2 or 300k or net worth. These companies you aspire to do behavioral interviews, and I’m guessing you’re failing them. Take a step back. You won’t “fail” life because you “only” got a job at one FAANG and not another, or because your net worth is only 100k straight out of college....even the sentence I just wrote sounds completely ridiculous. Your problems are stemming from how you view yourself and the world, which is full of false assumptions. A lot of smart people on HN have told you this —- you should listen to them.
    - lowiqengineer 6y ago
      > These companies you aspire to do behavioral interviews, and I’m guessing you’re failing them. Don't know why people say this. I'm usually pretty good at behavioral interviews. The problem is the algorithmic interviews (again, this is where my IQ fixation comes from). IDK man, compared to most everyone else I seem to have failed life at this point given that I have zero accomplishments and little financial security.
      - typest 6y ago
        Serious question: How do you know you're good at behavioral interviews? Have you ever seen the feedback written on a behavioral interview? The companies you're describing don't usually give out feedback to applicants, so you can't know, right? It sounds to me like you have anxiety. I'm saying this because I have anxiety, so I know what it's like. One hallmark of anxiety disorders is that you think things are true about the world, even though you don't actually have evidence this is the case. Or, you fixate on some pieces of information while ignoring evidence to the contrary, which again is irrational thinking. Or you hold assumptions about how the world works that aren't proven. You should look into cognitive behavioral therapy as a potential solution. You say "compared to everyone else". But, you have to acknowledge that the net worth and income numbers you named put you into the 99th percentile, right? So, you actually mean "compared to a very small subset of people I have failed", right? And this is just a completely irrational argument. I mean according to this vein of thinking, then since I don't have as much money as Jeff Bezos, I've failed. And the implication then is the whole world has failed. Right?
        lowiqengineer 6y ago
        I've always passed interviews that focused on behavioral aspects, I've frequently struggled in algorithm focused loops (bombed 2/4 in my Google onsite because, again, I'm intellectually inferior). Besides, until recently G didn't include any behavioral loops. > "compared to a very small subset of people I have failed" Compared to nearly everyone at elite universities I have absolutely failed. I'm sure some of them will become the Jeff Bezos of 2050 as well - it's irrelevant that it's still a small number. I don't want to be compared against somebody that works at Cisco or IBM for instance for the work and mental anguish I've put in.
  - scarface74 6y ago
    I was about to disagree with what seems like a personal attack but then without looking at the posting history of the poster you replied to and just looking at the username. I have to agree. On another note, I’m in my mid 40’s spent all of my time bouncing between yet another CRUD job most of my career (not complaining, it’s paid for a decent lifestyle in my relatively low cost of living area) and I’m always encouraging fresh CS grads to go for broke and take the r/cscareerquestions route of “grind leetCode and work for a FAANG”, knowing they will make more fresh out of college than I did until a few months ago. Someone else’s success is not my failure.
CJefferson 6y ago
I've never been hired or approached by Google. However, as a University lecturer I know a lot of people Google have employed. In my opinion, they have rejected some of the greatest students I have ever taught, and accepted some idiots who know how to speak well. While they have employed some good people, I believe they purposefully taret the type of people who think working at Google makes you a fundamentally better person than anyone else, rather than the best programmers/researchers/AI/whatever.
- joshuamorton 6y ago
  > In my opinion, they have rejected some of the greatest students I have ever taught There's no question that Google is happy to have false-negatives in interviews. > I believe they purposefully taret the type of people who think working at Google makes you a fundamentally better person than anyone else why would they do this? And, if they do this, how are they generally speaking so successful? (this is also an amusing comment because the only group I find more critical of Google than HN is Googlers)
  - CamperBob2 6y ago
    And, if they do this, how are they generally speaking so successful? The usual recipe for success in tech: competitors who are even less competent. See also: how Microsoft dominated personal computing back in the day.
    - joshuamorton 6y ago
      Then this would imply that selecting for people who want to work at Google, instead of the "best candidate" is a valid strategy because it leads to better outcomes. Again I think this whole line of thinking is nonsense, but even if you take it at face value, it still doesn't make sense.
    - sukilot 6y ago
      >Microsoft dominated personal computing back in the day. By making illegal deals with PC sellers, and by vandalizing apps running on their OS.

lowiqengineer 6y ago

Of course. I'm well aware that I'm considered mentally defective (or maybe just garden variety low IQ) by the hiring committee. That doesn't really change my observation here.

albacur 6y ago
You pop up in every post about Google or Facebook and make the conversation about yourself, wallowing in self pity because you didn't land a job there straight out of college. This might sound harsh, but you need to get over it and move on.
- typest 6y ago
  ^^ what this guy said. You named yourself lowiqengineer because your SAT score was “only” 2200. That’s in the 98th percentile —- if it were an IQ test, it would get you into Mensa, the organization for high IQ people! You talk as if people from FANG (your invented acronym to exclude Amazon) look down on all others, but it seems that you are the one looking down on all others, everyone who wasn’t lucky enough to get into G/FB straight out of college while also building up not just 1, but 2 or 300k or net worth. These companies you aspire to do behavioral interviews, and I’m guessing you’re failing them. Take a step back. You won’t “fail” life because you “only” got a job at one FAANG and not another, or because your net worth is only 100k straight out of college....even the sentence I just wrote sounds completely ridiculous. Your problems are stemming from how you view yourself and the world, which is full of false assumptions. A lot of smart people on HN have told you this —- you should listen to them.
  - lowiqengineer 6y ago
    > These companies you aspire to do behavioral interviews, and I’m guessing you’re failing them. Don't know why people say this. I'm usually pretty good at behavioral interviews. The problem is the algorithmic interviews (again, this is where my IQ fixation comes from). IDK man, compared to most everyone else I seem to have failed life at this point given that I have zero accomplishments and little financial security.
    - typest 6y ago
      Serious question: How do you know you're good at behavioral interviews? Have you ever seen the feedback written on a behavioral interview? The companies you're describing don't usually give out feedback to applicants, so you can't know, right? It sounds to me like you have anxiety. I'm saying this because I have anxiety, so I know what it's like. One hallmark of anxiety disorders is that you think things are true about the world, even though you don't actually have evidence this is the case. Or, you fixate on some pieces of information while ignoring evidence to the contrary, which again is irrational thinking. Or you hold assumptions about how the world works that aren't proven. You should look into cognitive behavioral therapy as a potential solution. You say "compared to everyone else". But, you have to acknowledge that the net worth and income numbers you named put you into the 99th percentile, right? So, you actually mean "compared to a very small subset of people I have failed", right? And this is just a completely irrational argument. I mean according to this vein of thinking, then since I don't have as much money as Jeff Bezos, I've failed. And the implication then is the whole world has failed. Right?
      - lowiqengineer 6y ago
        I've always passed interviews that focused on behavioral aspects, I've frequently struggled in algorithm focused loops (bombed 2/4 in my Google onsite because, again, I'm intellectually inferior). Besides, until recently G didn't include any behavioral loops. > "compared to a very small subset of people I have failed" Compared to nearly everyone at elite universities I have absolutely failed. I'm sure some of them will become the Jeff Bezos of 2050 as well - it's irrelevant that it's still a small number. I don't want to be compared against somebody that works at Cisco or IBM for instance for the work and mental anguish I've put in.
- scarface74 6y ago
  I was about to disagree with what seems like a personal attack but then without looking at the posting history of the poster you replied to and just looking at the username. I have to agree. On another note, I’m in my mid 40’s spent all of my time bouncing between yet another CRUD job most of my career (not complaining, it’s paid for a decent lifestyle in my relatively low cost of living area) and I’m always encouraging fresh CS grads to go for broke and take the r/cscareerquestions route of “grind leetCode and work for a FAANG”, knowing they will make more fresh out of college than I did until a few months ago. Someone else’s success is not my failure.

CJefferson 6y ago

I've never been hired or approached by Google. However, as a University lecturer I know a lot of people Google have employed. In my opinion, they have rejected some of the greatest students I have ever taught, and accepted some idiots who know how to speak well. While they have employed some good people, I believe they purposefully taret the type of people who think working at Google makes you a fundamentally better person than anyone else, rather than the best programmers/researchers/AI/whatever.

joshuamorton 6y ago
> In my opinion, they have rejected some of the greatest students I have ever taught There's no question that Google is happy to have false-negatives in interviews. > I believe they purposefully taret the type of people who think working at Google makes you a fundamentally better person than anyone else why would they do this? And, if they do this, how are they generally speaking so successful? (this is also an amusing comment because the only group I find more critical of Google than HN is Googlers)
- CamperBob2 6y ago
  And, if they do this, how are they generally speaking so successful? The usual recipe for success in tech: competitors who are even less competent. See also: how Microsoft dominated personal computing back in the day.
  - joshuamorton 6y ago
    Then this would imply that selecting for people who want to work at Google, instead of the "best candidate" is a valid strategy because it leads to better outcomes. Again I think this whole line of thinking is nonsense, but even if you take it at face value, it still doesn't make sense.
  - sukilot 6y ago
    >Microsoft dominated personal computing back in the day. By making illegal deals with PC sellers, and by vandalizing apps running on their OS.