Interviewing (or any selection process for that matter) is a highly subjective and noisy process. I’ve been accepted and rejected at FAANGs / startups / top s

Interviewing (or any selection process for that matter) is a highly subjective and noisy process. I’ve been accepted and rejected at FAANGs / startups / top schools. I’ve succeeded wildly at each one. I’ve had the same academic paper accepted and rejected from top conferences. The papers have all gotten cited more than the vast majority of research papers accepted. The ones who rejected me could probably come up with a list of flaws but they would have probably not been that useful. If they were being honest with themselves, they would probably admit they have no insight into how to judge something or someone comprehensively based on the limited time and information they had. You may be rejected because an interviewer thinks you’re weak at something you’re actually not, based on your response during the interview. The truth is that it is impossible determine what a candidate is truly strong or weak at based on a 1hr interview. The best you can do is test someone a number of times and if they succeed a greater number of times than the average strong candidate, conclude that they’re a strong candidate too. There is no objective measurement of one’s strengths and weaknesses here.