3 ms·

>If it makes you feel better, I have a CS bachelor's and I still get imposter syndrome on a fairly regular basis I hear this a lot. The difference is that I ob

>If it makes you feel better, I have a CS bachelor's and I still get imposter syndrome on a fairly regular basis I hear this a lot. The difference is that I objectively am an impostor. I've worked with plenty of Stanford/Berkeley CS grads and can conclusively say that I am a worse programmer than them and will never be as good. My concern is that eventually the number of those people will be so great that mediocre devs will be pushed out of the market. I'm honestly incapable of passing these Leetcode/Google style algorithm interviews which are skewed towards CS grads, and that's increasingly becoming the standard for every company regardless of size.

cmrdporcupine 6y ago
If you're like me you probably are entirely capable of passing those interviews -- with practice !-- and are probably absolutely fine as a programmer, but are at a disadvantage because it's not the type of stuff you've ever had to do on a regular basis. CS degrees train people to think that that kind of thing is what programming is ("why else did I pay thousands for this degree?"), and then they go out into the industry and propagate that in interview processes, and believe that failing these tests in an interview is an obvious indicator that someone is "lying" about their programming ability. The reality is that for many of us programming is a far more experimental and experential process, and I will use all sorts of algorithmic and data structure techniques but will go read or acquire that knowledge in the process of creating. It's not something I feel comfortable doing on a whiteboard in front of a person or group of people.
dmarchand90 6y ago
I don't have a CS degree either and this does worry me. Luckily it kinda seems like the interviews weigh heavily towards algorithms, which I think is feasible to study alone (might be hard to do while working admittedly). Don't be too discouraged the vast majority of programmers are not going to be from elite institutions ever
chrisseaton 6y ago
> I'm honestly incapable of passing these Leetcode/Google style algorithm interviews Almost everyone is completely incapable of passing a Google interview. That's because they're astronomically hard and they only take the very very best people who are at the top of their fields. I've no hope of passing one either. But so what? There's always going to be some place that you aren't going to be able to get a job no matter how good you are. Look somewhere else - there's so many more options.
- cmrdporcupine 6y ago
  Most Googlers are also not capable of passing them. Because they make them harder every year. I've trained twice to give interviews at Google and I just find it demoralizing to administer questions which I myself would find difficult to solve. But correct answer to the question isn't actually necessary. They're looking for your thought processes, and what it reveals about your knowledge and/or techniques, not necessarily correct answers. Some questions don't even have "correct" solutions.
- jedimastert 6y ago
  > That's because they're astronomically hard and they only take the very very best people who are at the top of their fields. I would disagree with that. It's because coding problems are a very specific skill. It's essentially being good at riddles with extra esoteric knowledge thrown in.
jedimastert 6y ago
> The difference is that I objectively am an impostor. Imposter how? Did you lie on your resume? To your co-workers?I would assume not. You were judged on (presumably) the same criteria as anyone else, and found to be at an acceptable level. Maybe other people are better than you, and that's fine. But if you weren't "good enough", they probably wouldn't keep paying you, and your manager would probably say something. It's kind of the point of performance reviews.

cmrdporcupine 6y ago

If you're like me you probably are entirely capable of passing those interviews -- with practice !-- and are probably absolutely fine as a programmer, but are at a disadvantage because it's not the type of stuff you've ever had to do on a regular basis. CS degrees train people to think that that kind of thing is what programming is ("why else did I pay thousands for this degree?"), and then they go out into the industry and propagate that in interview processes, and believe that failing these tests in an interview is an obvious indicator that someone is "lying" about their programming ability. The reality is that for many of us programming is a far more experimental and experential process, and I will use all sorts of algorithmic and data structure techniques but will go read or acquire that knowledge in the process of creating. It's not something I feel comfortable doing on a whiteboard in front of a person or group of people.

dmarchand90 6y ago

I don't have a CS degree either and this does worry me. Luckily it kinda seems like the interviews weigh heavily towards algorithms, which I think is feasible to study alone (might be hard to do while working admittedly). Don't be too discouraged the vast majority of programmers are not going to be from elite institutions ever

chrisseaton 6y ago

> I'm honestly incapable of passing these Leetcode/Google style algorithm interviews Almost everyone is completely incapable of passing a Google interview. That's because they're astronomically hard and they only take the very very best people who are at the top of their fields. I've no hope of passing one either. But so what? There's always going to be some place that you aren't going to be able to get a job no matter how good you are. Look somewhere else - there's so many more options.

cmrdporcupine 6y ago
Most Googlers are also not capable of passing them. Because they make them harder every year. I've trained twice to give interviews at Google and I just find it demoralizing to administer questions which I myself would find difficult to solve. But correct answer to the question isn't actually necessary. They're looking for your thought processes, and what it reveals about your knowledge and/or techniques, not necessarily correct answers. Some questions don't even have "correct" solutions.
jedimastert 6y ago
> That's because they're astronomically hard and they only take the very very best people who are at the top of their fields. I would disagree with that. It's because coding problems are a very specific skill. It's essentially being good at riddles with extra esoteric knowledge thrown in.

jedimastert 6y ago

> The difference is that I objectively am an impostor. Imposter how? Did you lie on your resume? To your co-workers?I would assume not. You were judged on (presumably) the same criteria as anyone else, and found to be at an acceptable level. Maybe other people are better than you, and that's fine. But if you weren't "good enough", they probably wouldn't keep paying you, and your manager would probably say something. It's kind of the point of performance reviews.