4 ms·

This guy is one of those LinkedIn thought leader types prone to oversharing for attention.

rsweeney21 4y ago
lol thanks! I actually hate the attention, in part because of comments like this one. Though this one was comparatively mild. I do it to generate sales leads for my startup. We're bootstrapped so being able to generate leads without any ad spend or outbound sales means we don't have to raise money to grow. I used to write blog posts but they take so much longer. Hence no new posts on the blog since 2019. Now I focus on LinkedIn. A single viral post on LinkedIn can get 2M-5M views on average. It will generate $1M-$2M in potential business for us. This way I can spend 50% of my time writing code, 45% doing CEO stuff, and 5% doing marketing.
ignoramous 4y ago
That's harsh because TFA does mention that they feel outright uncomfortable (even after 18 years!) how big a role luck played in them clearing that fizzbuzz interview question: > I've struggled with this a lot over the years, but I finally decided to share my story. I don’t think I would have made it past the first round of interviews at Microsoft if I hadn’t gotten so lucky. So pretty much, my entire career is built on one amazing stroke of luck. ...which explains why they felt like they "cheated".
- buran77 4y ago
  Out of pretty much all the people I know, I can't think of any successful career not pivoting on one such fateful moment of "luck". One lucky question/answer, one fortunate encounter, one near miss. Of course we'll never know how the road not taken looks like. Any moment could actually be a pivotal one but most are very unassuming and only the memorable ones stick with us, making them feel more important. Also, as someone who's been tested with this kind of questions (in the math and physics fields at least), I realized many times you aren't evaluated for knowing the answer but for how you go about trying to find it even if you fail. This particular question is close to my heart as I was tested with it as a pupil in school. The teacher wrote this on the blackboard and asked me to come over and solve it (not having any prior knowledge). After a bit of fidgeting with the chalk I stared writing on consecutive lines 1, 1+1, 1+1+1 and after a few lines it dawned on me it looks like the "lower" half of a square of side n as cut by its diagonal. So I proudly concluded that the sum is n^2/2. Which was of course wrong, I forgot to add an n/2 to that since the "diagonal" is shifted right a bit. Still got top mark and maybe it was one of those moments that set me on a path. This went on through high-school, university, post graduate studies, and early career. It was only when I was knee-deep in real work that people started to care less about how I think and more about just the end result. Preparing for this kind of question isn't cheating as long as you understood the answer.
  - DeathArrow 4y ago
    Gauss solved the same problem in a very similar fashion when he was a kid.
    - tdumitrescu 4y ago
      I remember this too, from our 4th-grade "G&T" math teacher telling us the story. Although I use the formula so rarely that I don't keep it memorized, whenever it does come up, I think back to that day in class and that moves the gears enough that I can derive it empirically pretty quickly from small-number examples and the knowledge that it involves two consecutive numbers.
  - belter 4y ago
    > Out of pretty much all the people I know, I can't think of any successful career not pivoting on one such fateful moment of "luck". One lucky question/answer, one fortunate encounter, one near miss. You are so correct (at proper timestamp): https://youtu.be/3LopI4YeC4I?t=211 https://youtu.be/3LopI4YeC4I?t=211
  - ignoramous 4y ago
    Not disagreeing with your points. > Preparing for this kind of question isn't cheating as long as you understood the answer. TFA notes that because of lack of interview prep material in 2004, even when the author knew the question before-hand, it took them days to arrive at an optimal answer. And then it dawned on them that everyone else at the job fair, who may be seeing a question for the first time, only had 15 mins in a pressure-cooker situation to solve it. TFA also notes that the author intentionally misled the interviewer as if they were solving the puzzle then and there: I casually explained how I could simply use a mathematical formula to calculate the sum of 1 to n (like, who doesn’t know the sum(1 to n) formula?) and compare that to the sum of the integers in the array. I slowly wrote out the solution I had come up with over days of thinking about the problem, being sure to pause periodically as if I was figuring it out for the first time. I talked through my thinking and made sure I had all the proper error checking in place. I double and triple checked my syntax. My handwritten code was perfect.
codingdave 4y ago
I believe that the attention he is seeking is simply marketing. Almost all of his content revolves around hiring and working in tech, which is the core focus of his business. The overall trend is, "I've seen the bad, and built something better, so check us out." I don't have a problem with people marketing themselves on LinkedIn - it that not the entire purpose of the site?

lol thanks! I actually hate the attention, in part because of comments like this one. Though this one was comparatively mild. I do it to generate sales leads for my startup. We're bootstrapped so being able to generate leads without any ad spend or outbound sales means we don't have to raise money to grow. I used to write blog posts but they take so much longer. Hence no new posts on the blog since 2019. Now I focus on LinkedIn. A single viral post on LinkedIn can get 2M-5M views on average. It will generate $1M-$2M in potential business for us. This way I can spend 50% of my time writing code, 45% doing CEO stuff, and 5% doing marketing.

ignoramous 4y ago

That's harsh because TFA does mention that they feel outright uncomfortable (even after 18 years!) how big a role luck played in them clearing that fizzbuzz interview question: > I've struggled with this a lot over the years, but I finally decided to share my story. I don’t think I would have made it past the first round of interviews at Microsoft if I hadn’t gotten so lucky. So pretty much, my entire career is built on one amazing stroke of luck. ...which explains why they felt like they "cheated".

buran77 4y ago
Out of pretty much all the people I know, I can't think of any successful career not pivoting on one such fateful moment of "luck". One lucky question/answer, one fortunate encounter, one near miss. Of course we'll never know how the road not taken looks like. Any moment could actually be a pivotal one but most are very unassuming and only the memorable ones stick with us, making them feel more important. Also, as someone who's been tested with this kind of questions (in the math and physics fields at least), I realized many times you aren't evaluated for knowing the answer but for how you go about trying to find it even if you fail. This particular question is close to my heart as I was tested with it as a pupil in school. The teacher wrote this on the blackboard and asked me to come over and solve it (not having any prior knowledge). After a bit of fidgeting with the chalk I stared writing on consecutive lines 1, 1+1, 1+1+1 and after a few lines it dawned on me it looks like the "lower" half of a square of side n as cut by its diagonal. So I proudly concluded that the sum is n^2/2. Which was of course wrong, I forgot to add an n/2 to that since the "diagonal" is shifted right a bit. Still got top mark and maybe it was one of those moments that set me on a path. This went on through high-school, university, post graduate studies, and early career. It was only when I was knee-deep in real work that people started to care less about how I think and more about just the end result. Preparing for this kind of question isn't cheating as long as you understood the answer.
- DeathArrow 4y ago
  Gauss solved the same problem in a very similar fashion when he was a kid.
  - tdumitrescu 4y ago
    I remember this too, from our 4th-grade "G&T" math teacher telling us the story. Although I use the formula so rarely that I don't keep it memorized, whenever it does come up, I think back to that day in class and that moves the gears enough that I can derive it empirically pretty quickly from small-number examples and the knowledge that it involves two consecutive numbers.
- belter 4y ago
  > Out of pretty much all the people I know, I can't think of any successful career not pivoting on one such fateful moment of "luck". One lucky question/answer, one fortunate encounter, one near miss. You are so correct (at proper timestamp): https://youtu.be/3LopI4YeC4I?t=211 https://youtu.be/3LopI4YeC4I?t=211
- ignoramous 4y ago
  Not disagreeing with your points. > Preparing for this kind of question isn't cheating as long as you understood the answer. TFA notes that because of lack of interview prep material in 2004, even when the author knew the question before-hand, it took them days to arrive at an optimal answer. And then it dawned on them that everyone else at the job fair, who may be seeing a question for the first time, only had 15 mins in a pressure-cooker situation to solve it. TFA also notes that the author intentionally misled the interviewer as if they were solving the puzzle then and there: I casually explained how I could simply use a mathematical formula to calculate the sum of 1 to n (like, who doesn’t know the sum(1 to n) formula?) and compare that to the sum of the integers in the array. I slowly wrote out the solution I had come up with over days of thinking about the problem, being sure to pause periodically as if I was figuring it out for the first time. I talked through my thinking and made sure I had all the proper error checking in place. I double and triple checked my syntax. My handwritten code was perfect.

codingdave 4y ago

I believe that the attention he is seeking is simply marketing. Almost all of his content revolves around hiring and working in tech, which is the core focus of his business. The overall trend is, "I've seen the bad, and built something better, so check us out." I don't have a problem with people marketing themselves on LinkedIn - it that not the entire purpose of the site?