
Just say No to brainteaser questions at interviews - daleroberts
http://wilmott.com/messageview.cfm?catid=26&threadid=90631
======
TamDenholm
Since i'm a contractor i get interviewed a lot, i sometimes come up against
these brainteasers which i usually dont mind. Sometimes they're good questions
like how would i solve problem X using X language, because thats relevant, i
think its a good question.

However, i hate when i get questions like "how many golf balls can you get in
a double decker bus" and "whats your most embarrassing moment", both of these
were questions i was actually asked in an interview. My answer to the first
was "I dont know and i'm not going to try and work it out because 1) i dont
have enough information and 2) its not relevant to this position. I'd happily
answer hypothetical questions about situations that could plausibly come up
during this position, but working out number of golf balls in a bus doesnt
show you how i would solve the problem of the database running slow or
validation checks not working correctly." For the second one i simply answered
"I have never been embarrassed in a professional setting as i mainly just do
my job and i'm not embarrassed to say 'I dont know' or to ask for help. The
only times i've been embarrassed were in my personal life and those are
stories not appropriate for an interview."

Needless to say, these were questions asked by the CEO of a startup i thought
was absolutely amazing, i had sat through a tech interview with the CTO before
the CEO came in and felt i did well with the tech questions. Once the CEO came
in and asked me these questions, i wondered how an awesome startup was
achieving this success behind the leadership of total and utter moron. I
decided not to work there as i lost all respect for the CEO.

~~~
tomchristie
> "how many golf balls can you get in a double decker bus"... > 1) i don't
> have enough information and 2) its not relevant to this position.

Whilst I agree somewhat with the sentiment, I don't think that's at all an
unreasonable question.

1\. You _do_ very clearly have enough information to make a decent informed
guess. 2\. It _is_ a relevant question.

It's relevant because it assesses your general sense of numeracy. Whilst that
won't show how quickly you'd be able to deal with a database issue, it does
give an indication of how you might go about making broad judgement calls in
the absence of any hard-and-fast numbers. For example: Is it worth looking
into this database issue, or is it likely to be insignificant compared to the
network overhead?

~~~
marcusf
But if that's the information you're after, why ask for golf balls and busses?
These are real world quantities with decidedly different qualities than
whatever appears in standard computing scenarios. Describing how you'd go
about troubleshooting a three layer architecture with inordinate network load
on the database might be a better question then?

~~~
arethuza
I actually think that's a decent question - in many cases you _have_ to
estimate something based on incomplete information in a domain that you aren't
an expert in and maybe all you are after is an answer to the nearest order of
magnitude.

In my experience some people simply won't answer those questions - not because
they can't but because they aren't happy working that way. Of course, in some
situations you absolutely do need people who will _always_ work things through
from first principles and attempt to give as precise an estimate as they can,
but sometimes you don't.

------
Macsenour
A few years ago I was interviewed by Microsoft in Salt Lake City, now closed.
The job was a creative type job, a game designer. A fellow there said he was a
tough interviewer. He ONLY asked me brain teaser type questions. His first
question concerned a radio design 20 years from now. I drew what I thought it
might look like and he seemed unimpressed with my answer.

He then asked me this: "You and your family of 9 are on one side of the river,
there's a flash flood coming. There is a boat but it only holds 3 people. What
do you do?"

I said: "I get in the bow, row to the other side, and wave 'good luck' to my
family. See, I don't get along with my family very well."

He got a little agitated, and told me that in this case I love my family and
want to save them. He asked me to try again.

I said: "I flip the boat over to make it more buoyant, put the kids on top and
the adults hang on the sides."

He became angry: "There are piranhas in the river so you can't tough the
water. Try again."

I said: "I lay the oars of the boat so that more people can ride in the
boat..." He interrupted me by saying: "Just answer the question."

I said: "I have given you 3 creative and interesting answers. Since you are
NOT trained in psychology you don't have any way of understanding my answers
you feel frustrated."

He said: "This interview is over"

I said: "OK, but you know nothing about me".

I have refused to answer these types of questions since then.

~~~
hrabago
This is one of the biggest problems with these trick questions - there really
isn't a correct answer, just the answer that the interviewer wants to hear.

~~~
kcl
Kaspar Hauser, the now-educated feral child, answers the professor's
questions:

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9uqPeIYMik>

------
mgkimsal
I've had a few of these in my time, and I think, to an extent, they're legit,
and I'll explain why.

I was asked once - "how many gas pumps are in Raleigh?". I asked back "do you
mean pumps for the general public, or do we need to include
commercial/industrial pumps too?" and "do you actually mean Raleigh proper or
the metro Raleigh area? if so, how do we define that? All of the county?"

Next question was "go to the whiteboard and design a house". I took out the
marker, started to draw, then turned and asked "who will be living there? Is
this a single family or duplex? mobile home? stick built or modular?" and a
couple other questions.

I was told I was the first people to ask questions before drawing.

I take the point of the brainteaser-type questions to be "how do you react to
issues that come up where you don't know a lot of stuff?". For _some_
positions, this is less important, but if you're a customer-facing position -
even in development, you may interact with customers or other business units -
how do you react when you get odd-ball "left field"-type questions? Do you
keep your cool? Do you just react and say "that's stupid!"? Do you walk out in
protest? Do you probe for more detailed information before making a
pronouncement?

More than ever, I think 'brainteaser' questions are far more about
personality-judging than intellect or even raw "problem solving" ability.

~~~
msprague
Yeah, I agree with this. I've been asked a similar problem to the gas pump one
and a brain teaser one as well. The goal for them is to be able to get a
better feel for how you deal with the problems, not necessarily the solutions
that you come up and how accurate they are. Being a dick to an interviewer (as
basically suggested in comments above) is great if you like being unemployed.

~~~
mgkimsal
Additionally, though (and I think you're saying this), it's not just how you
come up with a solution from a technical/procedural standpoint. It's more -
how do you react in situations that are outside of your comfortzone? And as
you said, being rude to an interviewer is a sure way to stay outside their
company.

------
jeffool
Ahhh, I failed (flailed) one of these once! I spent minutes trying to figure
out "You have a business card in Japanese, how do you figure out what it
says?"

I asked if it had the phone number, they said yes, and I said the numbers are
the same as in English... They said "okay, what next?" ... I was stuck. Next?
Well, I suppose I could take a photo of it and ask for someone to translate it
online... Or find someone in real life to translate it for me...

After a couple of minutes, they were ready to move on, disappointed, when I
said "Well, short of asking for help, or Googling the phone number, I have no
idea off hand how to find it."

"Oh, well, searching the number, that's what we thought you were going for
initially."

It was. I'd thought they meant "next" as in "other than that method". Having
the number was so evidently "problem solved" for me, that I didn't explicitly
say "search out online". ... I suddenly felt like I was in grade school again,
and my teacher had failed me for not showing the work in math class. I had the
right answer, but would never get credit. I went on to flop the next question
or two, as I vaguely recall.

~~~
nandemo
The interviewer cannot guess what's in your brain. Part of being a good
communicator is being able to actually spell out your thoughts when necessary.

Besides, if you had said "then I search the number online" then it's plausible
the interviewer would ask what would you do if you didn't find anything
relevant right away. For instance, if you search for my cell phone number, you
get 0 results connected with me.

~~~
jasonlotito
> The interviewer cannot guess what's in your brain. Part of being a good
> communicator is being able to actually spell out your thoughts when
> necessary

The flip side is when the interviewer doesn't communicate well. Or asks a
specific question, but means something slightly different.

I've dealt with that before. Assumed they meant what they said, when the
reality was, they were being more precise than intended. My fault for assuming
I guess. I now try to clarify the intent, and make clear the precision.

------
kator
From the article: "I'm going to ask you to solve one of my problems for every
problem you ask me. Remember, an interview is a two-way process, I'm trying to
determine if I want to work with you too."

This is the best part really.. Instead of "just say no" remember it's a
dialog. If the brainteaser is interesting or you can quickly respond to how
you would approach solving it then don't be an jerk about it. And feel free to
have a dialog ask something back and see how they approach problem solving
etc. Make it fun and interesting for all involved. If you're going to work
with these people you might as well start right now in the interview!

I never take an interview with a potential client or employer without having a
very clear set of my own questions for them and getting those answered.

I often ask off the wall questions or talk about a deep problem we solved
recently and ask for the candidate for ideas on how they would approach the
problem. I always share the answer we came up with. The reason for the
question is not a perfect answer but to see how a candidate approaches
potentially solving the question.

------
patio11
Just say no to interviews. (Seriously. If a decision maker wants you hired
nothing resembling one takes place.)

~~~
kstenerud
Yeah, and this is how the boss's nephew gets hired into a management position
he's unqualified for, poisons the culture, destroys morale, and causes a mass-
exodus of quality people.

I wouldn't even hire my best friend without him interviewing with 4 people
(individually) who would be working with or close to him. I also wouldn't take
part in the interview myself, to ensure that the treatment was 100% fair and
merit based.

A personal recommendation gets you in the door to the interview faster, but
you still have to prove yourself, and if you're really that good you'd want us
to prove ourselves as well before signing on.

~~~
chc
That's probably also how Yukihiro Matsumoto, the creator of Ruby, got hired by
Heroku. Sometimes an interview really isn't necessary and can only do harm.

~~~
kstenerud
Exceptions do not invalidate the norm.

------
richieb
Here is something that I always wanted to do, but haven't had the nerve. At
the end of the interview, when you are asked "Do you have any questions?", I'd
like to say: "Yes. There are 5 sailors marooned on a desert island, and they
collect all the coconuts (.....). So what is the number of coconuts?"

------
marcusf
I'm not fond of brain teasers either, but small, self-contained questions have
value. Often if they're simple enough you can use them in many interviews and
establish a base line (if the candidate did a, b or c she will usually work
out, if she took route d, that betrays a weakness in X etc).

This is not a replacement for evaluation of a candidate on their own merits,
and having a good in-depth technical conversation. But I like having something
to ground my evaluations in as well and make them even slightly comparable.

For reference, I do the same thing when I get interviewed; I have a few
questions I ask any prospective company so I have some comparative way to
evaluate them. Never bad to try to have _some_ metrics in your process.

------
sambeau
The most important point in this post is this: "an interview is a two-way
process".

I am constantly surprised how many people come out of interviews without
asking detailed questions about the company, job, culture and work atmosphere.

You have to be more sure that that they will be a good fit for you than you
have to be for them. You will be one of many: they will be everything to you,
probably for years.

~~~
GoodIntentions
This is so completely true. The company is being assessed as much as the
candidate. Probably anyone who has interviewed candidates has lost one that
they really wanted to hire simply because the company 'failed the interview'.
I know I have.

Worthwhile candidates tend to have criteria and the self esteem required to
ask questions right back at you.

------
jonnathanson
I'm going to take the contrarian point of view here: partially for the sport
of it, and partially because I genuinely think there's value in puzzles and
brainteasers -- though I _do_ think the value is limited, circumstantial, and
merely one datum out of many in an interview.

These questions are about having a logical process, regardless of where it
gets you, and spelling that process out in a sequential fashion. It's more
important to communicate "I do X, and check for Y. Then I do Y, and check for
Z" than it is to arrive at a reasonably accurate Z. The added component of
pressure (i.e., you've only got a few minutes, in the uncomfortable setting of
an interview, in which to answer the question) helps (or allegedly helps)
detect your ability to remain calm and logical under tight deadlines.

Basically, the question is asking "Under pressure, and faced with a seemingly
insurmountable problem, will this candidate give up, or will he try to address
obstacles in a rational, collected, and systemized fashion?" They're
essentially variants on the Kobayashi-Maru test of Star Trek fame.

Furthermore, I don't agree with the apparent consensus that oddball "puzzle"
questions would be better replaced with more technically relevant
brainteasers. That's not the point. You have technical questions to test your
technical literacy. These questions are trying to test your character.
(Brainteasers are often non-technical precisely because the interviewer
doesn't want you to be able to fall back on existing knowledge as an escape
hatch from the question). Some brainteaser/puzzle questions are much more
inane than others, but the exercise itself isn't entirely worthless.

I have never asked a puzzle question in an interview. If I were compelled to
do so, I would never hire someone purely on the basis of his or her
performance on one. It's one of the least important variables in a hiring
process. But I'd consider with some skepticism anyone who outright refuses to
answer a brainteaser, or who gets totally flummoxed by one, or who gives up
without at least attempting to work out an approach.

Ultimately, no single type of interview question is flawless. That's why you
have a wide variety in your arsenal. You've got technical questions, case
questions, puzzle questions, whiteboard questions, and even the oft-derided
"Tell me about a time when..." questions. In isolation, none of these types is
sufficient. In combination, they test different aspects of a candidate's
thought process and preparation.

~~~
daleroberts
Brainteasers and problems are fun and I love doing them. I just think it's not
appropriate for an interview, especially when you catch an interviewer
presenting you with questions that are simply taken from known 'problem
banks'. I could have easily pretended to work through them like I've never
seen them before but I think it's a lot more truthful to call them out and say
'I know all your questions'.

~~~
jonnathanson
_"especially when you catch an interviewer presenting you with questions that
are simply taken from known 'problem banks'"_

Sure, but then, almost all interview questions can be similarly gamed. If an
interviewer asks me to "walk him through my resume," or to "Tell him about a
time when I did X," does he really expect that I haven't thoroughly prepared
and rehearsed those answers? And if I truly haven't, then that's saying quite
a bit about how seriously I take the process.

I'm not suggesting that brainteasers are _as_ valid as other question types.
There are plenty of question types that better get to the heart of the
candidate's aptitude, experience, skills and capabilities, domain knowledge,
and so forth. But everything can be rehearsed for. I don't think that's a
valid categorical critique of the puzzle type.

Better arguments against puzzle questions, IMO, are: 1) They might select for
good bullshitters, as opposed to good thinkers; 2) The opportunity cost of
spending time on a puzzle question is the time that could be spent on a more
relevant question; 3) Some people just aren't good at (or interested in)
puzzles, but that doesn't mean they're not awesome on the job -- ergo, passing
on a candidate because he flunked a puzzle is much sillier than passing on a
candidate because he flunked a technical exercise. (Conversely, loving a
candidate because he kicked a puzzle's ass is even sillier).

~~~
daleroberts
Good points. That is probably why people are often not successful on their
first interviews. It takes a few to get into "interview mode" where you have
good answers for common questions about your CV.

I was quite dismayed when I called them out and they didn't come back with new
questions or made up some on the spot. They simply decided to drop that part
of the interview and move to the next section.

I've seen too many good people (friends and students of mine) miss out on jobs
simply because they failed these type of problems.

~~~
jonnathanson
_"I've seen too many good people (friends and students of mine) miss out on
jobs simply because they failed these type of problems."_

With this I would absolutely concur. I have more than a few friends who are
smart, and who are rock-solid performers, but who just don't have a knack for
brainteasers. I would hope than an interviewer is able to suss this out in an
interview, i.e., make the determination that a person is great in every
aspect, would probably be a great fit, but just happens to suck at puzzle
questions. Sadly, I'm sure it's more often the rule than the exception that an
interviewer will reflexively pass on someone who flubs a puzzle.

And I agree with you that puzzle questions require flexibility not only on the
part of the interviewee, but also on the part of the interviewer. If you're
just tossing out questions based on a book of canned puzzles, don't be
surprised when you get canned responses. The exercise becomes entirely
meaningless when that happens, and there's really no use in proceeding with it
if it does.

------
marcog1
The main problem I have, is when I've seen the answer to a question but don't
remember it 100%. Your brain generally goes into recall mode, and rather than
actually solving the problem I sometimes give an inaccurate answer and it can
become hard to kick your brain back into thinking the answer through.
Sometimes telling the interviewer you've heard the question before is enough
to make him move on, other times they want to hear your answer anyway.

~~~
diminish
yes, one of my friends, who works aggressively on brain teasers, got accepted
to a job offer due to ability to solve such questions. however he told me that
he knows thousands of variations of such problems. When asked he just pretends
as if he is thinking to solve them, but he said most interviewers indeed are
at a beginner level for such questions.

------
tokenadult
The review article "The Validity and Utility of Selection Models in Personnel
Psychology: Practical and Theoretical Implications of 85 Years of Research
Findings"

[http://mavweb.mnsu.edu/howard/Schmidt%20and%20Hunter%201998%...](http://mavweb.mnsu.edu/howard/Schmidt%20and%20Hunter%201998%20Validity%20and%20Utility%20Psychological%20Bulletin.pdf)

sums up, current to 1998, much of the HUGE peer-reviewed professional
literature on the industrial and organizational psychology devoted to business
hiring practices. There are many kinds of hiring screens, such as resume
reviews for job experience, telephone interviews, in-person interviews, checks
for academic credentials, and so on. There is much published study research on
how job applicants perform after they are hired in a wide variety of
occupations.

The overall summary of the industrial psychology research in reliable
secondary sources is that two kinds of job screening procedures work
reasonably well (but only about at the 0.5 level, standing alone). One is a
general cognitive ability test (an IQ-like test, such as the Wonderlic
personnel screening test). Another is a work-sample test, where the applicant
does an actual task or group of tasks like what the applicant will do on the
job if hired. Each of these kinds of tests has about the same validity in
screening applicants for jobs, with the general cognitive ability test better
predicting success for applicants who will be trained into a new job. Neither
is perfect (both operate at about 0.5 level in validation studies), but both
are better than anything else that has been tested in rigorous research,
across a wide variety of occupations. So if you are hiring for your company,
it's a good idea to think about how to build a work-sample test into all of
your hiring processes.

For legal reasons in the United States (the same consideration does not apply
in other countries), it is difficult to give job applicants a straight-up IQ
test (as was commonplace in my parents' generation) as a routine part of a
hiring process. The Griggs v. Duke Power, 401 U.S. 424 (1971) case in the
United States Supreme Court

[http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=8655598674229196...](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=8655598674229196978&q=Griggs+Duke+Power&hl=en&as_sdt=2,24)

held that cognitive ability tests used in hiring that could have a "disparate
impact" on applicants of some protected classes must "bear a demonstrable
relationship to successful performance of the jobs for which it was used." In
other words, a company that wants to use a test like the Wonderlic, or like
the SAT, or like the current WAIS or Stanford-Binet IQ tests, in a hiring
process had best conduct a specific validation study of the test related to
performance on the job in question. Some companies do the validation study,
and use IQ-like tests in hiring. Other companies use IQ-like tests in hiring
and hope that no one sues (which is not what I would advise any company). Note
that a brain-teaser-type test used in a hiring process might be illegal if it
can be shown to have disparate impact on some job applicants and is not
supported by a validation study demonstrating that the test is related to
successful performance on the job. Companies outside the United States are
regulated by different laws.

~~~
JoachimSchipper
I'm not too familiar with the US justice system, but I read the Wikipedia page
the last time you brought up that specific case. Reading (a little) between
the lines, Duke Power seems to have set out to discriminate against black
employees. That _seems_ very different from using an IQ test to select the
best employees, especially for a job that actually _is_ highly IQ-dependent.

~~~
ComputerGuru
It takes one bad apple to ruin it for the bunch, as they say.

That said, I lived and worked for a few years in a country where IQ tests were
the norm for hiring people. When hiring for my own team (C++ devs), I did not
use them as I found they were a very poor filter with both high false
positives and high false negatives in terms of indicating whether or not you
should hire a particular person.

------
b0sk
A contrarian p.o.v: They are going to lose out on exceptional cases where the
candidate is a great engineer but is not able to devise a strategy towards a
solution. However, there is a huge correlation between a good engineer and the
ability to arrive at the solution (keep in mind they look at how you arrive at
the solution too)

Personally, I'd make the candidate solve a decent intermediate level problem
using a computer (and Google too). Give him/her the closest approximation of
the typical job environment.

------
readme
I was once asked to solve the monty hall problem a couple days after I saw the
movie "21"

~~~
daleroberts
Apparently, even Erdös did not believe the solution to that problem. Imagine
saying no to him because he failed to come up with the correct solution.

~~~
driverdan
To be fair most explanations of the Monty Hall problem gloss over the most
important fact, that Hall knows the correct answer. When I first learned about
it I had a hard time comprehending it until I very carefully reread the
description and realized this key fact.

~~~
pauljburke
I can't remember where I read it (or I'd provide a link) but the real "a-ha"
moment for me came when I read "... so what if there's a million doors instead
of 3? Does that make a difference" (it doesn't to the argument but it does to
most people if you frame it in that way allegedly) in an explanation.

------
willvarfar
Crikey, you really think that attitude flies in interviews?

~~~
jvdh
Unless you're young and have little to no experience, that attitude will and
should fly. In that case the company should be just as much trying to convince
you as you are convincing them.

~~~
kahawe
> _Unless you're young and have little to no experience, that attitude will
> and should fly_

I can only see you coming across as an unpleasant person if you just start
asking the interviewer how many golf balls fit into a bus right after they ask
you why man hole covers are that size. And then there are companies like
google ( _and the many who blindly copy what they know about google's process_
) and the few available details about their interview process all point to the
fact that these brain teasers are really important to them for various
reasons, so that attitude or just not answering these questions at all or
asking them in return will very likely rule you out there - which is ok, of
course, if you do not really care much about working for them or not. But in
most companies, especially those using these dreaded brain teasers, I doubt
this will "fly" and in most startups they will just talk shop with you anyway.

And while these brain teasers might or might not tell them something about
you, you asking the interviewer a brain teaser is most certainly not going to
tell you anything about the company other than, well, they have a pretty
default and quaint approach to interviews. So what remains is definitely a bad
after-taste and if that is what you are going for then good for you. But don't
forget, most HR drones are pitiable people who have to make impossible
decisions about people they don't know based on all sorts of nonsense and lies
and then they are responsible when the new hire turns out really bad... so, no
wonder they rely on superstition and obscure magic to tell them the future
they can't possibly know.

Most importantly: If you are really that good and they all want you, you
shouldn't even have to deal with HR to begin with; you should be aiming for
that. So the whole thing is a completely moot point and the OP comes across as
quite arrogant.

~~~
georgemcbay
"I can only see you coming across as an unpleasant person if you just start
asking the interviewer how many golf balls fit into a bus right after they ask
you why man hole covers are that size."

Why is one any more unpleasant than the other? An interview is a two way
street.

If the company values brainteaser solving enough that brainteasers are asked
on interviews, why should someone considering working there just assume that
everyone there is capable of doing them? If my job were really similar to
solving brainteasers to the point where they are being asked on interviews to
judge my employability, I don't want to work there if my potential coworkers
suck at brainteasers, because then I'll just end up with an unfair workload
picking up the slack for them.

And if the company doesn't really value brainteaser solving ability, having
that pointed out to them by turning the tables is perhaps a very useful lesson
for them whether they realize it or not at the time.

------
EnderMB
Not everyone who asks these problems is an idiot. Given the amount of dick-
swinging that goes on from Google employees and the famed interviews one gets
from the big tech companies I can imagine a lot of younger managers reading
these and thinking that it's how you get hold of great engineers. The simple
fact is that a lot of the time interviewers aren't experienced at
interviewing, and most of them will spend longer formulating a process than an
interviewee will spend preparing for said interview.

Anyway, surely the ideal thing to do would be to play along with the
interview, answer the stupid question as best as you can and when the
interviewer ends with "any questions for us?" you ask them why the felt it was
necessary to test you on a general-purpose brainteaser with no relevance to
the job when they could have asked something more relevant, like "x". This way
you show that you roughly know what you're doing, you're aware of how the
interview went and you've provided a question that will make people sit up and
think.

------
oellegaard
This is very true. How to get past first interview, without ever knowing what
you are talking about: Take 15 interviews where you fail miserably, record
them all - at some point you have a pool of questions/answers that are good
enough to get past the first interview.

------
cao825
If anyone refused to answer questions like this in an interview I was running,
I would ask them to leave and tell them they wouldn't be hearing from us. I
don't care what your qualifications are, if you are an asshole who will not
take directions, then I don't want you in my department.

------
maeon3
"How much would you charge to naturally irrigate the sahara desert"?

"How many golf balls can you fit in a bus"

"How many piano tuners could be employed in Seattle?

These questions do have everything to do with a programming job, it tests your
ability to take an abstract problem and break it down logically into
reasonable parts. It's called a Fermi problem and if you are incapable of
thinking through them, I don't want to work with you.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_problem>

~~~
chc
You're really saying you don't want to work with people who:

1\. Don't know the volume of a golf ball

2\. Don't know the volume of a bus

3\. Don't know the amount of a bus's volume taken up by seats and other
protrusions

I think that's a little silly. I strongly doubt a single one of those will
make you a better programmer. Likewise, problem 1 is a physics problem. If
you're applying for a job programming physics simulations or video game
engines, it could be relevant, but otherwise I don't see how knowing the
physics of water would be helpful in the day-to-day experience of programming.

I see how the underlying skills of solving the problems could be helpful, but
in practice it seems like brainteasers tend to be more trivia than problem-
solving.

~~~
maeon3
You are not tested on your ability to remember the golf ball diameter or
equation to calculate how many spheres of diameter d can fit in cube c.

You are expected to demonstrate you can roll the concept around in your mind
and make progress toward answering the problem. When you do interviews you'll
find people who literally can't think to save their own lives. Their minds
have atrophied to the point that the only way they can solve a problem is to
have their hands held by a competent person and told "now i need you to find
the volume of a gold ball", at which point they would have to be instructed
how to do even that.

There are some idiots out there who have brains that have gone into coasting
mode. No new learning, no new problems, everything they learned up till this
point is the only thing they are capable of. You want to weed these people out
quick. This question does that wonderfully. The incorrect answer is "ummm. I
donno, and i don't know how to start.... Hold me".

