3 ms·

Note that ping-pong balls can be crushed or melted. Anyway, your reply establishes a weird power dynamic so if that's really how you do business, the candidate

Note that ping-pong balls can be crushed or melted. Anyway, your reply establishes a weird power dynamic so if that's really how you do business, the candidate dodges a bullet by your forthrightness.

mikeash 11y ago
What's weird about expecting one's employees to be capable of looking up basic facts on their own?
- oinksoft 11y ago
  It's not the expectation (irrelevant and "hoop jumping" as it is) but the rigid, adversarial tone. And like I said, there are numerous physical confounding factors that render your force-fed approach inadequate.
  - mikeash 11y ago
    Expecting people to be able to look up basic information is now irrelevant and "hoop jumping"? The adversarial tone was present in the original followup. I don't see what's wrong with continuing it. It's better than "sorry you feel that way, but we expect people to be capable of looking things up; there's the door." This is a pretty trivial question. It should take somebody who knows Google and grade-school math about 30 seconds to solve. I'll give you ten minutes just to be generous, though. Your "confounding factors" are irrelevant. If you crush or melt ping pong balls then what you're carrying are no longer "ping pong balls" so the question as asked can be answered by using the standard 38mm diameter of a ping pong ball and working from there.
    - oinksoft 11y ago
      You think those are the only confounding factors? What about tolerances so that no balls will be damaged in transit? Or is there an acceptable loss rate? How are the balls to be loaded into the trailer? Surely this is not a special ping-pong ball delivery trailer with a feeder and drainage pipe, so how will they be boxed? Do human factors affect the box size, and as a result, the number of balls that can fit? Will the trailers be stacked, and does this alter their capacity? If we don't have to box the balls, and they are stored tightly, could they settle in such a way as to become jammed, risking loss during unloading (tension is relieved, and they burst out the trailer)? Ping-pong balls are spherical, and the geometry of their fit is not as simple as that of rectangular objects, too. Are you expecting the candidate to solve a non-trivial geometry problem in a high-pressure situation? Why? Will the balls be transported between substantially different air pressures or temperatures? Is this important for ping-pong balls? See how this could coax a poor performance out of an inquisitive, somewhat introverted candidate, rendering a false negative? Beyond that, there's the more important adversarial tone: As an employee, will the smallest misstep result in termination? What if I have a problem that cannot be easily solved with a search engine? Is this a cooperative environment where I will feel somewhat secure as an employee, or is my status fragile? Is Mike a mercurial person who gives his employees brain-teasers with job performance implications?
      - mikeash 11y ago
        Some of those are reasonable questions, like the acceptable loss rate and packaging details. Some are things you should be able to look up yourself, like the fact that spheres aren't as simple to pack as cubes. (Sphere packing is a solved problem and you can look up the efficiency pretty easily.) My question is, if you need me to hold your hand from start to finish, then why would I pay you money just so I can do all of your work? No, I don't expect the candidate to solve a non-trivial geometry problem in a high-pressure situation. I do expect the candidate to solve a trivial Google problem in a high-pressure situation. And, what adversarial tone? The original question was reasonable. bobbytherobot's follow-up question was completely unreasonable. Once the candidate has decided to be adversarial, my decision to continue that no longer really says anything about the work environment. Can you not see the difference between "smallest misstep" and taking a pretty reasonable question and instantly turning it into a whine? Do you not see how it's ridiculous to ask, "or am I a researcher?" in response to that question? What position would you be interviewing for where you are not going to research some things?

Note that ping-pong balls can be crushed or melted. Anyway, your reply establishes a weird power dynamic so if that's really how you do business, the candidate dodges a bullet by your forthrightness.

mikeash 11y ago

What's weird about expecting one's employees to be capable of looking up basic facts on their own?

oinksoft 11y ago
It's not the expectation (irrelevant and "hoop jumping" as it is) but the rigid, adversarial tone. And like I said, there are numerous physical confounding factors that render your force-fed approach inadequate.
- mikeash 11y ago
  Expecting people to be able to look up basic information is now irrelevant and "hoop jumping"? The adversarial tone was present in the original followup. I don't see what's wrong with continuing it. It's better than "sorry you feel that way, but we expect people to be capable of looking things up; there's the door." This is a pretty trivial question. It should take somebody who knows Google and grade-school math about 30 seconds to solve. I'll give you ten minutes just to be generous, though. Your "confounding factors" are irrelevant. If you crush or melt ping pong balls then what you're carrying are no longer "ping pong balls" so the question as asked can be answered by using the standard 38mm diameter of a ping pong ball and working from there.
  - oinksoft 11y ago
    You think those are the only confounding factors? What about tolerances so that no balls will be damaged in transit? Or is there an acceptable loss rate? How are the balls to be loaded into the trailer? Surely this is not a special ping-pong ball delivery trailer with a feeder and drainage pipe, so how will they be boxed? Do human factors affect the box size, and as a result, the number of balls that can fit? Will the trailers be stacked, and does this alter their capacity? If we don't have to box the balls, and they are stored tightly, could they settle in such a way as to become jammed, risking loss during unloading (tension is relieved, and they burst out the trailer)? Ping-pong balls are spherical, and the geometry of their fit is not as simple as that of rectangular objects, too. Are you expecting the candidate to solve a non-trivial geometry problem in a high-pressure situation? Why? Will the balls be transported between substantially different air pressures or temperatures? Is this important for ping-pong balls? See how this could coax a poor performance out of an inquisitive, somewhat introverted candidate, rendering a false negative? Beyond that, there's the more important adversarial tone: As an employee, will the smallest misstep result in termination? What if I have a problem that cannot be easily solved with a search engine? Is this a cooperative environment where I will feel somewhat secure as an employee, or is my status fragile? Is Mike a mercurial person who gives his employees brain-teasers with job performance implications?
    - mikeash 11y ago
      Some of those are reasonable questions, like the acceptable loss rate and packaging details. Some are things you should be able to look up yourself, like the fact that spheres aren't as simple to pack as cubes. (Sphere packing is a solved problem and you can look up the efficiency pretty easily.) My question is, if you need me to hold your hand from start to finish, then why would I pay you money just so I can do all of your work? No, I don't expect the candidate to solve a non-trivial geometry problem in a high-pressure situation. I do expect the candidate to solve a trivial Google problem in a high-pressure situation. And, what adversarial tone? The original question was reasonable. bobbytherobot's follow-up question was completely unreasonable. Once the candidate has decided to be adversarial, my decision to continue that no longer really says anything about the work environment. Can you not see the difference between "smallest misstep" and taking a pretty reasonable question and instantly turning it into a whine? Do you not see how it's ridiculous to ask, "or am I a researcher?" in response to that question? What position would you be interviewing for where you are not going to research some things?