|
|
|
|
|
by pdimitar
2176 days ago
|
|
This is all true, I just wish people didn't put that much weight on some pretty random and oddly specific tech interview questions. I've practically [re-]invented Redis back in 2008 while working for a company, and wrote something very akin to the Google crawler bot in 2009 yet at some point 2 months ago I "fail" an interview because I didn't do the best possible optimization of a basic stock storage system that has packages at different weights (and valued in different currencies) and since I had to fit a whole mini web project in 2h I of course didn't pursue perfect optimization. But the thing was working pretty well and ticked all boxes that were required -- and perfect optimization wasn't mentioned otherwise I'd probably skip 1-2 features to achieve it and fit in the [arbitrary] schedule of the homework assignment. And then boom, you are no good because of a hidden requirement and unclear communication which aren't my fault. I do get your point. Really. But people put too much value on some pretty random questions / assignments as well. |
|
I've gotten my last few jobs and oppertunities by following co-workers from job to job. AKA doing good work and building good relationships with the people I worked with. I've been able to leverage these relationships to skip the phone screen at some of the big tech companies but still freeze up on the the white board interviews unfortunately in real life.
At the end of the day though I know what I have to do: Either study for 3 more months, stay where I'm at with my current pay, or switch careers entirely. Right now I'm leaning towards switching careers entirely.
At the end of the day though, if you've never worked with a person before, and your company doesn't do a good job firing people who aren't performing, I'm not sure of a better way to screen people in 45 minutes :(. And this is coming from the guy who's screened out himself.
There's _plenty_ of engineers out there. We're not special.