4 ms·

I think that's perhaps a naive interpretation. At the core of this question are a number of assumptions, and concepts to think about: - What is the rope made

I think that's perhaps a naive interpretation. At the core of this question are a number of assumptions, and concepts to think about: - What is the rope made of? How stretchy is it? How strong is it to tensile stresses? - What model of the earth are we using? A sphere (circular cross-section?) ellipsoid? Which axis of the ellipsoid? Does it take terrain into effect, or just gravitation? How does the rope avoid hitting terrain? - How does the rope stay suspended? how does it resist gravity? are there uniform thrusters on it? How are they fueled? - How is length added to the rope? Is it stretched somehow? Material added? How is the added material, if applicable, inserted? Ultimately, I think we need to know what project requirement is driving the question to be able to answer this. It would shed light on most of these assumptions. If it sounds like I'm being pedantic or overthinking the question, I'd disagree: These considerations are critical to giving a meaningful answer; otherwise the question doesn't make sense. Unless we're talking platonic forms or w/e.

cntainer 4y ago
It does sound like overthinking to me, but context is king. Without context/requirements we're just guessing. Maybe the job interview is for Space X and they're working on some new system of mini-satellites-on-a-rope called Hyper-rope, or maybe google is trying to pivot their failed Loon project into some kind of air-born connectivity solution, and the rope is actually a very long fiber-optic cable. Or the interview could be for an online eCommerce platform and the person being interviewed will most likely have to work in a huge heterogeneous codebase with all the important technical decisions already made. otherwise the question doesn't make sense Well that is my point. I love these types of subjects, but when I'm having a beer with friends and we find a puzzle like this one and we try to take it as far as possible without going into fiction/bullshit territory. So it could be useful to check/signal for culture fit, and in OP's case it actually worked like that OP: "We value people that love to get into this type of discussions/arguments" Interviewee: "Gosh, you guys bored me to death during the technical interview but it seems like we have similar tastes when it comes to theoretical puzzles so I'll give you another chance" Nothing wrong with this though. It just proves that interviewing is a complex process and actual merit and success are highly subjective.

cntainer 4y ago

It does sound like overthinking to me, but context is king. Without context/requirements we're just guessing. Maybe the job interview is for Space X and they're working on some new system of mini-satellites-on-a-rope called Hyper-rope, or maybe google is trying to pivot their failed Loon project into some kind of air-born connectivity solution, and the rope is actually a very long fiber-optic cable. Or the interview could be for an online eCommerce platform and the person being interviewed will most likely have to work in a huge heterogeneous codebase with all the important technical decisions already made. otherwise the question doesn't make sense Well that is my point. I love these types of subjects, but when I'm having a beer with friends and we find a puzzle like this one and we try to take it as far as possible without going into fiction/bullshit territory. So it could be useful to check/signal for culture fit, and in OP's case it actually worked like that OP: "We value people that love to get into this type of discussions/arguments" Interviewee: "Gosh, you guys bored me to death during the technical interview but it seems like we have similar tastes when it comes to theoretical puzzles so I'll give you another chance" Nothing wrong with this though. It just proves that interviewing is a complex process and actual merit and success are highly subjective.