3 ms·

The logic behind Google rejecting Max Howell, the author of Homebrew (2017)

10 points by caaqil 5y ago

ggm 5y ago
Ugh. What an awful conversation. A mix of the subject, subject matter experts, Googlers, non googlers deciding they "know" why a specific person got bounced from an interview process which pretty well everyone agrees is broken, but for differing reasons AND people disagreeing about why he got bounced and if it's a good or a bad thing. Personally I wouldn't have outed myself in this way. No good can come of it. It's interesting but it's making me wince. The author wrote a million+ user SAT solving package manager for OSX which I like but he probably lacks some core "fu" to get through a google interview and was pissed off about it. Most of the icky debate is about how stupid the whole process is with some side shots at arrogance, knowledge, formal training which i personally think reflect badly on.. everyone! Mainly, I found this a hard read because as a fully trained computer scientist back in 1982 I flunked an interview with the UK Antarctic survey, on a stupid Fortran question which I deserved to fail on, and blew my own chance of a dream job on the science programming mission. So I relate both to what he felt like, the ego hit, and the probable correctness of their decision. I was a prat. They spotted it at 20 paces and confirmed it with one quiz. Lessons hard learned. He was an autodidact seeking a job in a company which values formally acquired compsci knowledge highly and misunderstood something in turn. But, the points being made stand: the interviewees form instant impressions the questions are a winnowing method to lose candidates not find them, he assumed he had a pass in because millions of users but what they seek isn't what he had. Still hurts to be bounced on crap. And I have no doubt just how smart he is, and wonder if other teams and other hiring models might have found it.
- brirec 5y ago
  Back in 2019 I was interviewing for Google and they really gave me the royal treatment. Some parts of the on-site interviews with different team leads were absolutely bizarre, though: There was this one guy who asked me to do a relatively simple scripting problem on the whiteboard. I was forgetting an important piece of syntax and asked, “can I read a `man` page?” Only to be told, “No, I am your man page,” by the interviewer. This left a slightly sour taste in my mouth, and though I still gave it my all I suspect that this interviewer was the one who rejected me[1], because I did struggle with his problem. At the end of the whole process, the recruiter at Google told me that he wanted to make very clear that he thought I was “not quite ready” in my tech and interviewing to work at Google. He told me that he and almost everyone else he knew working there had gone through at least two entire interview processes before eventually landing a job there, and on top of giving me some specific recommendations on what to hone my tech skills on, he recommended some books on the Google interview process, and said to apply again in April 2020. Were it not for COVID fucking everyone’s plans up, I probably would have had that interview, and might have passed it after having more insight into its quirks. I guess what I’m getting at is that yeah, something probably is broken. Most companies don’t have books written on passing their interviews. But perhaps that’s part of the point? Google wants very specific kinds of employees. Not like very specific titles (I interviewed for “generalist”) but rather that they want a specific mindset and goal-oriented person to grow with them. That kind of person is statistically likely to study these sorts of materials more if they exist, so the crazy hiring practice is just its own litmus test for “Googleyness” (which is also an actual component that they rank potential hires on.) All that said, I suppose it’s time to look at what job listings they have to offer again… this time I also might be able to find a referral.
  - ggm 5y ago
    "Back" in 2019. Or.. last century as it feels like. Anyway, one of the comments in that quota thread appeared to say it's interesting to ask if current googlers could pass the test. The inference being a significant cohort might not. Culture fit is mainly what matters after core competencies. When I ask the guys doing selection where I work they say coding exercises and whiteboard coding reveal a lot about how people think and even at worst, are the least-worst choice. They consistently seem to say that domain specific knowledge is the least useful criterion. I do suspect some google interview people get off on the "no" trip when people express confidence in themselves. Some people just enjoy power trips. And it's next to impossible to be proven wrong. (Never applied to a FAANG don't have any scars or gripes)
MathMonkeyMan 5y ago
> I make really good things, maybe they aren't perfect, but people really like them. Surely, surely Google could have used that. Google is so large that I'm not certain this is true. Anyway, the interview is a particular kind of exam with volatile grading, so don't sweat it.

10 points by caaqil 5y ago

ggm 5y ago

Ugh. What an awful conversation. A mix of the subject, subject matter experts, Googlers, non googlers deciding they "know" why a specific person got bounced from an interview process which pretty well everyone agrees is broken, but for differing reasons AND people disagreeing about why he got bounced and if it's a good or a bad thing. Personally I wouldn't have outed myself in this way. No good can come of it. It's interesting but it's making me wince. The author wrote a million+ user SAT solving package manager for OSX which I like but he probably lacks some core "fu" to get through a google interview and was pissed off about it. Most of the icky debate is about how stupid the whole process is with some side shots at arrogance, knowledge, formal training which i personally think reflect badly on.. everyone! Mainly, I found this a hard read because as a fully trained computer scientist back in 1982 I flunked an interview with the UK Antarctic survey, on a stupid Fortran question which I deserved to fail on, and blew my own chance of a dream job on the science programming mission. So I relate both to what he felt like, the ego hit, and the probable correctness of their decision. I was a prat. They spotted it at 20 paces and confirmed it with one quiz. Lessons hard learned. He was an autodidact seeking a job in a company which values formally acquired compsci knowledge highly and misunderstood something in turn. But, the points being made stand: the interviewees form instant impressions the questions are a winnowing method to lose candidates not find them, he assumed he had a pass in because millions of users but what they seek isn't what he had. Still hurts to be bounced on crap. And I have no doubt just how smart he is, and wonder if other teams and other hiring models might have found it.

brirec 5y ago
Back in 2019 I was interviewing for Google and they really gave me the royal treatment. Some parts of the on-site interviews with different team leads were absolutely bizarre, though: There was this one guy who asked me to do a relatively simple scripting problem on the whiteboard. I was forgetting an important piece of syntax and asked, “can I read a `man` page?” Only to be told, “No, I am your man page,” by the interviewer. This left a slightly sour taste in my mouth, and though I still gave it my all I suspect that this interviewer was the one who rejected me[1], because I did struggle with his problem. At the end of the whole process, the recruiter at Google told me that he wanted to make very clear that he thought I was “not quite ready” in my tech and interviewing to work at Google. He told me that he and almost everyone else he knew working there had gone through at least two entire interview processes before eventually landing a job there, and on top of giving me some specific recommendations on what to hone my tech skills on, he recommended some books on the Google interview process, and said to apply again in April 2020. Were it not for COVID fucking everyone’s plans up, I probably would have had that interview, and might have passed it after having more insight into its quirks. I guess what I’m getting at is that yeah, something probably is broken. Most companies don’t have books written on passing their interviews. But perhaps that’s part of the point? Google wants very specific kinds of employees. Not like very specific titles (I interviewed for “generalist”) but rather that they want a specific mindset and goal-oriented person to grow with them. That kind of person is statistically likely to study these sorts of materials more if they exist, so the crazy hiring practice is just its own litmus test for “Googleyness” (which is also an actual component that they rank potential hires on.) All that said, I suppose it’s time to look at what job listings they have to offer again… this time I also might be able to find a referral.
- ggm 5y ago
  "Back" in 2019. Or.. last century as it feels like. Anyway, one of the comments in that quota thread appeared to say it's interesting to ask if current googlers could pass the test. The inference being a significant cohort might not. Culture fit is mainly what matters after core competencies. When I ask the guys doing selection where I work they say coding exercises and whiteboard coding reveal a lot about how people think and even at worst, are the least-worst choice. They consistently seem to say that domain specific knowledge is the least useful criterion. I do suspect some google interview people get off on the "no" trip when people express confidence in themselves. Some people just enjoy power trips. And it's next to impossible to be proven wrong. (Never applied to a FAANG don't have any scars or gripes)

MathMonkeyMan 5y ago

> I make really good things, maybe they aren't perfect, but people really like them. Surely, surely Google could have used that. Google is so large that I'm not certain this is true. Anyway, the interview is a particular kind of exam with volatile grading, so don't sweat it.