Over the past 2 months I have interviewed with several companies and 2 of them stood out at rejecting me. Let's call them Company A, and Company B!

> I know right? Developers are bad at naming!

I guess part of it is my fault too! I am old and slow. Doesn't like competitive programming and already forgot most of how to answer algorithm question. I can't even answer some of the algorithm question I've flawlessly answered back when I was fresh out of University.

## Company A

When I got chance to interview at Company A, they require me to answer HackerRank style interview. It's my first time in nearly a decade of working in the industry to feel like I'm in a classroom exam again. I hate it, and I deliberately voiced my distaste to the answers comment:

// Paraphrasing
// I'm sorry, I'm dumb!
// I never faced anything like this in real world work...
// ......

But guess what? My answer still pass the score, have a call with their VP, which proceed to have another call with their Lead Engineer.

Talked about my experience with Event Driven System and CQRS+ES and they decided that I am:
- Arrogant
- Too RND in my tech stack
- And overkill in CQRS+ES

And decided they don't need me.
They hate me for having a headstrong personality which translates as Arrogance to the perceiving end.

## Company B

Another HackerRank style interview. Guess I passed their score this time without me typing some strong comment and proceed to have another test with their Lead Engineer.
This time they want 5 question answered in google docs within 60 minutes.
Two of them stood out to me for being impossible to work on 12 minutes (60 / 5 if you're wondering). Or maybe I'm just old and dumb?!
The others are just questions copied word for word from Geeks For Geeks.

One of the question requires me to write a password brute force attack to an imaginary API.

The other requires me to find a combination of math `+` or `-` operation from `a strings of numbers` that results in `a number`.

My `Arrogance` kicks in and I start typing a comment

// Paraphrasing
// I am sorry but I feel this is impossible for me to think of in 12 minutes
// (60 / 5 if you're wondering)
// But I know you guys got this question from Rosseta Code!
// Here's the link, but I don't know the logic behind it

See? I've worked on this question back when I was still a University student and remember where to look at.

Unsurprisingly, I've heard the feedback that I was rejected although I've answered one of their question `FLAWLESSLY`. I know they are being sarcastic at this point. haha.


I was trying to be honest about what I can and can't do in the `N` minutes timeframe and the Industry hates me.

I guess The Industry love people who can grind `GFG` or other algorithm websites, remember the solutions out of their head, and quietly answer their `genuinely original question` without pointing the flaws back at them.

  • 3
    The operator expression evaluation problem is a favorite of mine. It leads into parenthetical eval and has some expansions and optimizations. My favorite variant is RPN, but most kids haven't touched one so I end up having to explain the operations too granularly. Sucks because it's the best way to gauge effective stack usage ability.
  • 7
    Some companies prefer to waste everyone's time and find someone who can solve irrelevant tasks, while others don't care who they hire so long as you can do the work.

    Neither approach is without failure though.

    That CV of yours and a good hour or so meeting is usually all it takes to work out if you'll be a decent social fit, and if you're CV is lying or over exaggerating your capabilities / expertise. If you can't explain in depth anything on your cv, or have a lack of confidence then I'll just move on to the next person.
  • 2
    @C0D4 agreed that there are other ways to screen a talent.
    Neither is ideal for both ends.

    I find any well written CV is just to pass HR / preliminary screening.
    No matter how much reference, experience and portofolio I can give as a prove is gonna convince people I can work unless I completed some sort of HackerRank test.
  • 5
    They do this because most applicants for a dev job can't actually code. Like, not at all. It's about weeding out these tons of useless fuckers.

  • 4
    @Fast-Nop I've never had the luxury of having to make it pass the 1st interview and be hogtied down to pass a test.

    But I've never had to put someone through it either. Sure some people can't code, or are juniors trying to get a seniors wage, but the bullshit only flies for so long before the dev fails under expected levels of pressure beyond their skill level.
  • 3
    There's a fine line between headstrong and arrogant. If your interviewer isn't sure which it is, then they may well just play it safe and pass (they don't really want to take the chance on hiring a highly arrogant person.)
  • 4
    @C0D4 Yeah, but hiring an imposter costs a lot of money. First, the job doesn't get done so that products are delayed. Second, you need to hire again, which also involves a lot of working time (screening CVs, holding interviews).

    I never had this problem because for my first job, I had the most relevant experience (doing shit in assembly) from my final thesis, and subsequent employers would notice that I held for many years in my first job.

    For future jobs, I have a relevant side project that requires quite some skills and thus proves that I can code.
  • 1
    @Fast-Nop doesn't it make you wonder why are there so many people applying but can't code for shit? Is it just because it's become a meme and people thinikg sw dev is a lot of money, that's my bet at least or people think they could copy paste their way to get a six figure salary
  • 2
    @matt-jd The Codinghorror article is already from 2007, that was before memes were as prominent as now. Even many CS graduates can't actually code.

    It's a huge gap between self-image and reality. The low end of the Dunning-Kruger curve: they know so little that they don't even realise it. And then their inflated egos crash upon making contact with reality.

    Another point is that the numbers are skewed. If you have 90 out of 100 applicants who can't do anything, they don't get hired, therefore they stay in the applicant pool and apply at many companies over and over. The other 10 do get hired and vanish from the pool. So you have a huge, constant trash bottom in the applicant pool.

    This also means that when companies boast they aim for the top 10%, what they actually do is just going for the applicants who aren't total idiots. It's not really about rockstar hiring.
Add Comment