So anyway - if you wanna work there, it doesn’t matter what you’ve done, or accomplished, or how you work with people, or how creative you are. If you know binary searches, you’re in.
That's not the logical conclusion. The only evidence is that if you don't know binary searches, you're not in.
Why doesn't he know binary search? If he had three phone screens and they all involved binary search, why didn't he learn more about binary searches after the first time?
They can take a look at the book offline. There's no need to spend time in the phone screen talking about it.
In any case, he was not applying for a book writing position.
I actually had three different phone interviews there. all failed because of my (obviously lacking) knowledge of implementing binary searches.
If a candidate cannot answer a basic CS question, then the process usually ends after the first phone screen. He probably got two more chances because he wrote the book.
Just curious, how many HN'ers have joined companies like Amazon,Google, after being rejected in the interview process the first time, and what's your story?
Ack seems a bit resentful - I genuinely think understanding algorithms matters in any case
, and it's well known that google do too. Sounds more like lack of preparation to me.
I have been rejected by Cerner's software engineer post in my Junior year, because that was the first time I heard of "behavior questions". For technical, they asked me how to implement classes for a chess game, and several simple sorting algorithms. I bombed it, and now I am on their blacklist of people not to give an interview. LOL. Not like I want to work for them anymore, just it's funny to know how long that blacklist is active, so I apply their job every semester.
No you are not in. I know 'binary searches' but I have been rejected after the phone interviews when I applied one year ago.
The asked problems were certainly harder than 'binary search', but these were not that DEEP problems. (I've solved much deeper problems in my life.) I don't know the reason of my rejection. My final solution was correct, I checked that afterwards. I was probably just not fast enough, and I made mistakes because of stress (which I corrected later). Also, when they asked 'how would you test it', I might answered incorrectly.
IMHO they use a boolean formula when evaluating you:
A and B and C and D
rather than
A or B or C or D
If you fail in one aspect (or at least they perceive that you fail in that aspect) they reject you, because they can find people who dont't fail in any aspects (or at least they perceive that).
This was the first time in my life that I've been rejected by a company. I was a bit angry for a day, but eventually I realized that it is not a big deal: they have plenty of people to choose from. Maybe I will try it once again if the startup that I am working on now fails. But I will practice more before the interview.
I think it's just that Google has thousands and thousands of applicants and can essentially hand pick the top from MIT, Stanford, CMU, Princeton etc. The competition is intense and their interview system is intense because of it.
Sometimes companies would rather miss a good person than accidentally hire a bad person. Google has no shortage of candidates, so they can turn down good hires and still fill their positions with other good hires. If they don't hire someone, it isn't always reflective of the candidate (although it can be).
I'm not sure what to think about Google's hiring practices. The ones I've met were normal guys, but everyone makes it seem like they are running some sort of Einstien era Institute fo Advanced Study over there. I've got to say, knowing basic algorithms isn't a high barrier to entry.
If author thinks it is required to know basic algorithms to get into Google, he should stop whining and learn the damn thing.
And, sadly that is required, but not enough. I know it by experience..
Looks like he did--in the comments to his post, Osherove says this (sorry, not linkable):
BTW - I DID sit down and learn how to implement a binary search after the first time I got asked. I do not like leaving things 'open' like that. so the next time I got asked I had a much better and faster answer. But it wasn't fast enough (I assume - they never said why)
April 5, 2011 | Registered CommenterRoy Osherove"
That's not the logical conclusion. The only evidence is that if you don't know binary searches, you're not in. Why doesn't he know binary search? If he had three phone screens and they all involved binary search, why didn't he learn more about binary searches after the first time?