Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

You say that as if you were born perfect. As someone of elder years myself (and not just by SV standards), what you are saying is quite obvious to anyone with experience. But when you're young and know everything, it's not so obvious. We too, were brave believers of complex == good in our youth. Well, I sure was.

It's also important to learn by failing (aka learn by doing). Like parenting, there are many things in organizational behavior that can't be learned until you experience it for yourself. Few of us can be told "don't do that" and will internalize it to the degree necessary, without experiencing personally what happens when you do "do that". These people graduating from top schools and going straight into FAANG are doing themselves a disservice of the worst kind, by missing out on important organizational learning experiences.

On that note, I recommend everyone either get fired from a job, or work for a company so bad you quit, at least once. I also recommend it at most once. :)

As for inverting a binary tree, with your experience you must realize that the very large majority of applicants are poseurs. You need to filter them with easy things like inverting a binary tree. Most companies need "doers" not "thinkers". Even at the highest levels of pseudo-management (staff and above IC), you really better be able to do this kind of easy stuff.



I'm sorry if I made it sound like I was born perfect. That wasn't what I was trying to convey. Yes, we learn by making mistakes, and I've sure made at least my fair share of them. My point is that horking out algorithms on demand is definitely not the same thing as being a competent software engineer, nor is it particularly predictive of the likelihood of developing those skills. Also, I measure my success by the people I've helped and the impact I have on the business. For instance, figuring out how to eliminate 500,000+ lines of code from a codebase strikes me as way more valuable than hopping about at a whiteboard like a trained monkey. Ask better questions, get more impactful employees.


Agreed!! Sorry I didn't mean to accuse you of anything.

I share your criticism for poor interview practices. But not that basic knowledge whiteboard questions are asked -- sadly, it's a requirement -- rather that most don't get beyond that. Or dwell on the classic "OMG how could you not know this piece of trivia that we only learned here at our org after 12 years refining the solution".

Anyway I adore that kind of interview. It lets me know I don't want to work there! I call those interviews successful. Most candidates (or at least most discussion of interviews from the candidate POV) seem to think the entire purpose of an interview is to prostrate yourself to the all powerful company, that they may see you as worthy, oh master. It's the wrong perspective.

So while I share your criticism, I am not dismayed by it.


> I measure success by the people I've helped

As someone of younger years (by SV standards), hearing the authenticity in this thread is refreshing. What path in the world of tech will put one around peers who intentionally focus on real impact on people and business?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: