8 ms·

There is no shortage of swe. What I see and what I have experienced first hand is that companies, especially the more hyped/small ones, pretend to be FAANG and

There is no shortage of swe. What I see and what I have experienced first hand is that companies, especially the more hyped/small ones, pretend to be FAANG and gets very picky when interviewing. They often employ FAANG style interview. Now, if I really have to spend that much time prepping to interview at your unprofitable company (that most likely will go under) don’t you think that I would try my best to work at faang instead ? As matter of fact, I was rejected at plenty of these small insignificant companies, but end up having offers as L6 at FAANG. Be humble and you will find plenty of good engineers out there. I know tons of good swe that don’t want to interview/ work at mega FAANG, and if I was running a business I would definitely try to attract those talents by being different. Offering a “normal and reasonable” interview process along with better perks, flexibility and wfh. Instead, they all want to run bizzilion of micro services in k8s

rootusrootus 4y ago
I definitely think "we do not do leetcode interviews" and maybe "we only have three interviews total" would be selling points on a job posting. People who are experienced in the field don't want to go through the same hoops that newbies do just to prove they know how to write basic algorithms.
- adamsmith143 4y ago
  http://they.whiteboarded.me/companies-that-dont-whiteboard.html http://they.whiteboarded.me/companies-that-dont-whiteboard.h...
  - Patrol8394 4y ago
    I am not sure if this is kept up to date. I did interview at DoorDash and they definitely do leetcode style interview.
- whimsicalism 4y ago
  Personally I do because I enjoy working with very smart people. The backlash against leetcode is the same as backlash against other types of tests: most people are going to fail and most people don't like failing, so they blame the test.
  - Patrol8394 4y ago
    leetcode == smart ? oO that's new I interview many candidates at FAANG, I can easily tell the ones that have prep by just doing leetcode and the ones that knows the shit. I couldn't care less if you can solve all kinds of complex dynamic programming challenges. I ask coding questions that you won't find in leetcode and requires problem solving skill and good craft. And this is because I do like working with smart people and not with people good at memorizing patterns.
    - whimsicalism 4y ago
      I consider solving technical challenges in interview the "LC style" interview as compared with talking about your past experience or language trivia grab bag. I am not saying literally ask questions found on leetcode.com I think it is easier to know the shit to do LC interviews than somehow memorizing the question bank. I haven't seen many people succeed who were unskilled but managed to just memorize the questions.
      - Patrol8394 4y ago
        so how come that I find a good chunk of swe at FAANG are not that smart, and barely get anything done. Plus the quality of their work (generally speaking) is very low compared to what one would expect. And this is true across the board, it is a recurring theme when talking with peers. I think LC style interview have ruined the interview process in the tech industry. Note: I do ask candidates to code during the interview, but I ask things that are related to real problem, some of which, I had to solve in my day-to-day. In addition, I put a lot of emphasis on how well they articulate their thought process, and the quality of their craft. Also, I would not discount `past experience talk` that easily. Actually I use that to drill down in their resume to better understand their real contribution. More often than not, people just lie. They are very easy to spot. At that point is game over. I don't care if you nailed the coding. If you lie and oversell yourself you are done. Another thing that I find very annoying is that very often interview are conducted by junior engineer, and they don't have imo the maturity and experience to properly assess candidate skills and potential. You either do well according to what their expected solution is, or you are out. Interviewing is not just a binary process coding well yes/not. It is a little more involved. I passed candidates that did not do well on coding, but I was convinced they had potential. Whereas I did not pass candidate that did very well on coding, but did not show any interest or passion at all.
- throwaway2037 4y ago
  You wrote: <<People who are experienced in the field don't want to go through the same hoops that newbies do just to prove they know how to write basic algorithms.>> I am constantly interviewing candidates for roles at my company. It seems like CVs are a complete gamble. Either some are lies, or wildy understated, and everything in between -- at all levels of experience! "[J]ust to prove..." and yet so many can not do the 2022 version of FizzBuzz. I am stunned how many senior (well, so they say!) hands-on technical applicants cannot do basic things like write a very simple linked list class, or explain to me how a hash map works. For get about explaining the finer points of sorting algorithms (honestly, very low value in my line of work). There is no reasonable alternative to testing of some kind for hands-on techincal roles -- I am flexible about method: (1) white board coding (ugh in 2022), (2) IDE/text editor on shared PC / video chat (meh / eh in 2022), or (3) take home (the best in 2022, even if there are drawbacks for people with families). Joel Spolsky said it best about hiring: The goal is to avoid bad hires. Average and above are fine.
  - Goronmon 4y ago
    ...explain to me how a hash map works. For get about explaining the finer points of sorting algorithms I've been in software development for 15 years and being able to explain either of these things has never come up and I probably wouldn't be able to give a decent answer without reviewing the topics specifically.
    - whimsicalism 4y ago
      Yes, companies are hiring for competency not tenure or years of life lived while holding job. If you want the latter, I have heard it is more structured that way in Japan and much of Europe. I would expect most people I hire to be able to explain how a hash map works.
      - csomar 4y ago
        Depends on what exactly your company is doing? Why do you care if an applicant understand how a hash map works; and what's particular about a hash map? I'd care more about an applicant understanding the concept of a hash; or hashing in general. If an applicant shows that he understands that a hash is a magical and fascinating mathematical concept; and it can have uses in Information/Computers, that would be more interesting (to me) than someone who memorized a hash map definition. He can always learn about a particular application of hashing (hash map, for example). But the latter shows aptitude and capacity to learn these later on the job.
- battery_glasses 4y ago
  Basic algorithms? FAANG algorithm questions are usually far from basic.
- mattnewton 4y ago
  > "we do not do leetcode interviews" and maybe "we only have three interviews total" would be selling points on a job posting. It depends on the job. I have had interviews that broke the mold here and were panel discussions or more job-talk experience, and I found the interviews uniquely exhausting because they required their own set of skills to study for that were different from the “leet code” style. At the extreme end were the take home projects, which I simply didn’t have time to do for every company and were extremely unattractive to me for that reason. I actually find doing leetcode style interviews for me required the least amount of prep and was the most straightforward, especially when they were structured to leave me with time to ask and talk to real engineers at the company.
- lmm 4y ago
  Three interviews is now an "only"? Man this industry is fucked.
grumple 4y ago
I agree with some of what you said, mainly this: > Now, if I really have to spend that much time prepping to interview at your unprofitable company (that most likely will go under) don’t you think that I would try my best to work at faang instead ? I feel the same way. That said, my company and many others make the interview process much easier but still find it difficult to hire. I know this is a common problem, because I get bombarded with good job postings by recruiters and they are usually still there months later when I finally get around to responding.
jansommer 4y ago
Companies have only tested my code skills and handed me personality tests when applying for full time jobs. As a freelancer, I get one or two interviews where I talk to the architects, tech leads and managers, and that's it - either I'm in or out after that. They end up treating me as an employee anyway, so don't really know why this distinction is made in the first place, but I suspect HR.
kube-system 4y ago
I don't think FAANG style interviews are a good way to do it, but it is more important to be picky about hiring at a small company. If you're in a company where everybody knows everybody, then any new hire will affect the entire team. A good hire will pull the whole team up. A bad hire will negatively affect everyone.

rootusrootus 4y ago

I definitely think "we do not do leetcode interviews" and maybe "we only have three interviews total" would be selling points on a job posting. People who are experienced in the field don't want to go through the same hoops that newbies do just to prove they know how to write basic algorithms.

adamsmith143 4y ago
http://they.whiteboarded.me/companies-that-dont-whiteboard.html http://they.whiteboarded.me/companies-that-dont-whiteboard.h...
- Patrol8394 4y ago
  I am not sure if this is kept up to date. I did interview at DoorDash and they definitely do leetcode style interview.
whimsicalism 4y ago
Personally I do because I enjoy working with very smart people. The backlash against leetcode is the same as backlash against other types of tests: most people are going to fail and most people don't like failing, so they blame the test.
- Patrol8394 4y ago
  leetcode == smart ? oO that's new I interview many candidates at FAANG, I can easily tell the ones that have prep by just doing leetcode and the ones that knows the shit. I couldn't care less if you can solve all kinds of complex dynamic programming challenges. I ask coding questions that you won't find in leetcode and requires problem solving skill and good craft. And this is because I do like working with smart people and not with people good at memorizing patterns.
  - whimsicalism 4y ago
    I consider solving technical challenges in interview the "LC style" interview as compared with talking about your past experience or language trivia grab bag. I am not saying literally ask questions found on leetcode.com I think it is easier to know the shit to do LC interviews than somehow memorizing the question bank. I haven't seen many people succeed who were unskilled but managed to just memorize the questions.
    - Patrol8394 4y ago
      so how come that I find a good chunk of swe at FAANG are not that smart, and barely get anything done. Plus the quality of their work (generally speaking) is very low compared to what one would expect. And this is true across the board, it is a recurring theme when talking with peers. I think LC style interview have ruined the interview process in the tech industry. Note: I do ask candidates to code during the interview, but I ask things that are related to real problem, some of which, I had to solve in my day-to-day. In addition, I put a lot of emphasis on how well they articulate their thought process, and the quality of their craft. Also, I would not discount `past experience talk` that easily. Actually I use that to drill down in their resume to better understand their real contribution. More often than not, people just lie. They are very easy to spot. At that point is game over. I don't care if you nailed the coding. If you lie and oversell yourself you are done. Another thing that I find very annoying is that very often interview are conducted by junior engineer, and they don't have imo the maturity and experience to properly assess candidate skills and potential. You either do well according to what their expected solution is, or you are out. Interviewing is not just a binary process coding well yes/not. It is a little more involved. I passed candidates that did not do well on coding, but I was convinced they had potential. Whereas I did not pass candidate that did very well on coding, but did not show any interest or passion at all.
throwaway2037 4y ago
You wrote: <<People who are experienced in the field don't want to go through the same hoops that newbies do just to prove they know how to write basic algorithms.>> I am constantly interviewing candidates for roles at my company. It seems like CVs are a complete gamble. Either some are lies, or wildy understated, and everything in between -- at all levels of experience! "[J]ust to prove..." and yet so many can not do the 2022 version of FizzBuzz. I am stunned how many senior (well, so they say!) hands-on technical applicants cannot do basic things like write a very simple linked list class, or explain to me how a hash map works. For get about explaining the finer points of sorting algorithms (honestly, very low value in my line of work). There is no reasonable alternative to testing of some kind for hands-on techincal roles -- I am flexible about method: (1) white board coding (ugh in 2022), (2) IDE/text editor on shared PC / video chat (meh / eh in 2022), or (3) take home (the best in 2022, even if there are drawbacks for people with families). Joel Spolsky said it best about hiring: The goal is to avoid bad hires. Average and above are fine.
- Goronmon 4y ago
  ...explain to me how a hash map works. For get about explaining the finer points of sorting algorithms I've been in software development for 15 years and being able to explain either of these things has never come up and I probably wouldn't be able to give a decent answer without reviewing the topics specifically.
  - whimsicalism 4y ago
    Yes, companies are hiring for competency not tenure or years of life lived while holding job. If you want the latter, I have heard it is more structured that way in Japan and much of Europe. I would expect most people I hire to be able to explain how a hash map works.
    - csomar 4y ago
      Depends on what exactly your company is doing? Why do you care if an applicant understand how a hash map works; and what's particular about a hash map? I'd care more about an applicant understanding the concept of a hash; or hashing in general. If an applicant shows that he understands that a hash is a magical and fascinating mathematical concept; and it can have uses in Information/Computers, that would be more interesting (to me) than someone who memorized a hash map definition. He can always learn about a particular application of hashing (hash map, for example). But the latter shows aptitude and capacity to learn these later on the job.
battery_glasses 4y ago
Basic algorithms? FAANG algorithm questions are usually far from basic.
mattnewton 4y ago
> "we do not do leetcode interviews" and maybe "we only have three interviews total" would be selling points on a job posting. It depends on the job. I have had interviews that broke the mold here and were panel discussions or more job-talk experience, and I found the interviews uniquely exhausting because they required their own set of skills to study for that were different from the “leet code” style. At the extreme end were the take home projects, which I simply didn’t have time to do for every company and were extremely unattractive to me for that reason. I actually find doing leetcode style interviews for me required the least amount of prep and was the most straightforward, especially when they were structured to leave me with time to ask and talk to real engineers at the company.
lmm 4y ago
Three interviews is now an "only"? Man this industry is fucked.

grumple 4y ago

I agree with some of what you said, mainly this: > Now, if I really have to spend that much time prepping to interview at your unprofitable company (that most likely will go under) don’t you think that I would try my best to work at faang instead ? I feel the same way. That said, my company and many others make the interview process much easier but still find it difficult to hire. I know this is a common problem, because I get bombarded with good job postings by recruiters and they are usually still there months later when I finally get around to responding.

jansommer 4y ago

Companies have only tested my code skills and handed me personality tests when applying for full time jobs. As a freelancer, I get one or two interviews where I talk to the architects, tech leads and managers, and that's it - either I'm in or out after that. They end up treating me as an employee anyway, so don't really know why this distinction is made in the first place, but I suspect HR.

kube-system 4y ago

I don't think FAANG style interviews are a good way to do it, but it is more important to be picky about hiring at a small company. If you're in a company where everybody knows everybody, then any new hire will affect the entire team. A good hire will pull the whole team up. A bad hire will negatively affect everyone.