Hacker News Reader

A while ago I was contacted by a FAANG recruiter and so I said, sure, I'll interview with you. Then I started looking at all the material they send to prepare you. And I started looking at all the sites dedicated to passing the interviews. I started working the leetcode problems, but the more I did the more pissed off I got that this is what it comes down to.

> I'm doing 5 per night, and even more on the weekends. As I get closer to onsites, I'm going to be studying 8 hrs a day on weekends and leaving my kids to my wife.

I'm not going to do this. No job is worth that much stress to me.

The kids can have these jobs. There are plenty of other interesting development jobs. They pay well, just not FAANG well.

The reason to complain about a bad thing, is because in the entire history of the world, nothing ever got better because people accepted things as they were.

You benefit right now, in countless ways, from past versions of those exact same people you are so tired of hearing. Awesome gratitude, and way to pay it forward.

And what's your suggestion to make it better? Giving us the definition of complaining... well thanks.

There is a correlation between these horrendous interviews and quality of candidates otherwise, if they were full of false positives, we would stop doing them.

The problem is they produce false negatives and how do we go about fixing that? Is it even that big of a problem? These are all debatable. We haven't hit the point where hiring is SO expensive that we can't handle false negatives, we may in the future, then we'd work much harder at addressing the current situation.

>if they were full of false positives, we would stop doing them.

Or the alternate explanation. Hiring is incredibly difficult, everyone is bad at it, and the best solution people can come up with is to cargo cult Google's hiring process.

From experience I know there are many companies that have absolutely no evidence to support their hiring process, they just do it because it's the current fad.

And I assure you whiteboard interviews are full of plenty of false positives. Particularly now that people are spending so much time prepping for the interviews. You know the saying about metrics ceasing to he useful

It will be a big problem if your false negatives become your competitors.

But hiring IS crazy expensive because of the hours of effort spent by existing employees on the hiring side of the process, and the difficulty of finding "good" candidates who are willing to spend those hours plus even more of their own on the being hired side.

In other industries people just don't talk about spending 6-8 hours a week every week interviewing applicants--not even in high-turnover industries. That's an incredible cost, but it's not counted as a line item, just yet another annoyance of the annoying hiring process.

Agreed it's expensive.

My claim is it's not expensive enough yet for decision makers to actively explore alternatives. Will it get there as supply of quality engineers decrease? Maybe. Probably.

In my experience the companies I worked at tracked it very well, and we knew exactly how many hours were spent on hiring related work and how much it was costing us. We still used the current industry standard whiteboard, full day approach.

Yes, but those hours aren't actually a line item when salaried employees do it, so the expense isn't as visible as other expenses.

I think the perception of a lack of quality engineers in the market is just a symptom of the problem: the expense in time and annoyance of changing jobs and the risk (or experience) of becoming a false negative reduces job mobility and heavily slants the resume stack towards the true negatives rather than the experienced people who would be more actively looking around in a saner market.

I haven't heard of a better explanation for the notion, seemingly unique to software, that so many people floating around the industry are so abysmally unqualified to work at another company in the same industry. There are historical factors, but they don't seem adequate to explain this perceived fraud problem.

I've been employed since the 1990s, and I've seen the world pre-Internet. I'm exactly one of the people that have seen the changes in the industry, including in hiring practices and have been forced to adapt.

I've interviewed at Microsoft when they asked me how to find the fake coin based on N number of weighings. I've gone to Silicon Valley Brass Ring job fairs during the Dotcom Boom where they interviewed onsite and I was asked to code on the spot. During that era, various companies asked me things like what the largest number was for a 2^64 number or what the current Linux kernel version was, or what the default TCP timeout was.

And since Google came on the scene with their focus on algos, the entire industry has changed again. Every year the interview process in Silicon Valley has gotten harder and harder. That's the reality. Crying about it won't change it.

If I had the power to change it, I would hire fast and fire fast, like Netflix. But that comes with its own problems as well, so there is no best solution. All you can do is adapt and change with the industry. I know I'm not smart or ambitious enough to ever make it to the highest echelons of a company to affect culture so I'm happy getting paid as much as I can until I retire.

Some of my former co-workers are STILL stuck in the same company 16 years later. I still have lunch with them at least once a year, and they are petrified to change companies even though this current company keeps laying people off and replacing them with offshore workers. They don't have the guts to buckle down and study and adapt, so they're waiting to get laid off, which is sad to me.

> But it's the reality of the industry right now.

It really, really isn't. Thanks for the reminder of why I would never live/work in SV. I have never encountered anything like this in many years of working and taking new jobs. Mostly they look at my resume, we talk about stuff I've done, there's maybe a couple simple technical questions specifically related to things I've done and things that the position will involve, and that's about it.

It is in the DC area.

I appreciate your differing perspective. But just because you're willing to make those sacrifices doesn't mean it's right or that everyone should have to.

You don’t have to, but you won’t get a job at FAANG.

Yep that's probably true. But boy oh boy is FAANG overrated in my opinion. To be fair, some people might like the opportunity to double their salary by working twice as much. But I'm not convinced any of them are making the right choice of what to do with their time here.

It’s closer to double for about the same amount of work if my friends back home are any indication (and I work for the frugal FANG)

So if you're talking 200-300k for 35 hours a week of fully remote low stress work then yeah, I'm all mixed up on this topic.

Well not remote, but pay and hours very reasonable at G specifically. I do a little more for a bit less but I’m satisfied :)

I know that Amazon doesn’t require their AWS Solutions Architects to do leetCode. I doubt that Microsoft or Google do.

My first interview in my last amazon loop was a canonical popular leetcode question (Alien Dictionary).

The rest weren’t, however. I surely got points off in my interview for pointing out how practiced Alien Dictionary was for anyone studying for an interview.

I hate that problem. I would have walked. I get ticked off every time I work some leetcode because that's what we're being reduced to and problems like Alien Dictionary are the ones that really set me off. It's just stupid. Insultingly so.

What are other popular canonical coding questions/puzzles?

From my experience, "Solutions Architects" are closer to "Sales Engineering" vs pure software roles. YMMV.

Exactly. Pre-sales, post sales, and proofs of concepts. Technical Account Managers seem to lean more on the software/proof of concepts side.

Third party AWS partners can have consultants who are more software architects.

But SAs are all over the map between pure sales => infrastructure (lift and shifters) => "cloud native" architects/developers.

I'm ok with this.

My point is that it's the reality. Change and adapt or die along with the COBOL programmers. I watched the COBOL programmers get laid off in droves after Y2K and the dotcom bust so it's a lesson I won't forget. Sure there are some COBOL programmers making mint as consultants but the total number were laid off with prejudice.

Okay I can appreciate that point. I guess why I disagree is that while I agree that you need to adapt to new technologies, you should never need to adapt to absurd hoop jumping in terms of working nights and weekends just to get hired. Ie. I do not accept the idea that, "well x hours of interviews and code trivia is normal so you need to just go do that."

At that point I would rather die than adapt. I'll go do demolition with Peter Gibbons and see my kids evenings and weekends.

I wish I had other options, but the only thing I've ever done in my life is code. I can't even put together IKEA furniture very well, so I'm effectively useless everywhere else.

That is incredibly sad to hear. I wouldn't hire you based on your inability to adapt and learn new things. You may get through the coding questions but with an attitude like that (without lying) you aren't going to get threw the interview. Not to say that you ACTUALLY wont... I really hope you do but just keep in mind they are looking for more than a robot.

I'm totally okay with you not wanting to hire me. Even at my age, I get about a 50% acceptance rate from my onsites. I would rather take a coding job that pays me well than start from the beginning in any other industry. If all it takes is a few months of studying, I'll take it.

That sounds like a perfectly valid approach to me.

What I often get caught up on, and really hope to see more people in this field consider, is that there's more than one way to live a life worth living. And often to find that, it means walking away from a high-stress, long-hour FAANG-like job, even if your salary suffers.

I've known a few people who gave their 20s to Silicon Valley and didn't have a whole lot of joy to show for it after.

But again, this doesn't mean it's wrong to make the conscious decision to stay in that life. Especially if you've found a way to make it all work and you're happy.

Adaptation does not require shutting up and being silent about faults of the thing you are adapting to.

It does not mean one needs to pretend everything is super great.

You're assuming the current rules are somehow fundamental reality, they're not. There's no law of nature that says technical interviews are axiomatic. Part of the adaption process can be forcing the abstract silly rules to adapt.

The problem here is that you are just wrong. You are speaking in universals that don't apply universally. I've been in software for near 25 years and have never interviewed anywhere that shared the practices you describe. Sure it's just a personal anecdote, but so is yours.

No, you are wrong. The OP was talking about his experiences in Silicon Valley. I was also talking about my experiences in Silicon Valley not about yours outside of it. I can guarantee if you are in Silicon Valley, this is par for the course.

The OP mentions SV but doesn't restrict its comments to it. It states "But it's the reality of the industry right now." not "..reality of the industry right now in the valley."

I have no problem with your claims when restricted to the valley. They are pretty much spot on for it and a good reason not to live there.

I don't know how you can get anything out of or the time to work through 5 problems per day, have a day job, and a life (going to the gym, family, friends, eating, taking care of my life). I guess it's possible, but sounds almost like you might be setting yourself up for total burnout. I've tried that and after a week or 2 of that I'm extremely tired and have difficult time doing much when it comes to coding and problem solving or even work.

I have a couple onsite at FAANG coming up in the next few weeks and I decided to buy a year of InterviewCake to work through the problems. I'm trying to do at least 1 per day or so and more on weekends. I'm about 2/3 of the way through the course and will go through again when I'm done and supplement with Cracking the Coding Interview, High Scalability blog, and probably some LeetCode problems. Otherwise, I have a job right now I'm very happy with and comfortable. I can always try again if I want to give it a shot.

Counterpoint. I’m 45. A hands on developer, an occasional team lead and have never had to do a leetCode style interview, never studied “Cracking the Code”.

Most of the local startups are recruiting me to be the “adult supervision” and were asking me architectural questions.

More power to you. I personally haven't not seen a leetcode-style interview in at least 15 years in Silicon Valley. There's also system design questions these days and I was told Google does "Computer Science Fundamentals" and Facebook does "Distributed Systems Design" specifically.

What metro area are you being recruited in?

While ageism is real, I like your spirit and somewhat agree.

Probably the hardest part of looking for and getting a FTE gig is starting over clearing a space for yourself I think. It's tough to switch from being the local expert to just another FNG.

Personally (like anyone cares, but this is the internet after all) I'd like to find a really interesting job and I don't give a rip about the money. I suppose there's always open source, but working for free violates all kinds of my internal makeup.

I've had over 10 jobs in my career so starting over, making new friends, learning new code bases from scratch etc is old hat to me. I wish interviews would test for that instead of leetcode.

Most senior level jobs don't even break 200k. Sure for a faang job it should be expected to play this game no matter how silly it is. But for 99% of positions out there it's absurd.

> I'm auditioning for a role as "senior programmer", just like an actor would. That's the reality, and if I'm going to get myself a job that pays ~$400,000/yr in total comp, I will jump through whatever hoops I need to.

Your will power, mental flexibility and cognitive endurance -- should deserve nothing but praises.

I am going to add an additional assumption here, is that throughout your work, you were able to impress people you worked for and with, in the same way.

So you have built a network of 'admirers' so to speak, of your skills.

With that, you should, evaluate if these types of capabilities deserve more, than what you will be getting.

When you sign up to work for a company that does not particularly value your experience, your network -- but instead demands up-to-date / or needle-in-haystack interview skills -- you are trading reduced risk (of a salaried employee for a large corp), in exchange for reduced financial reward.

Other venues your own startups, your own contracts, may be joining ad-hoc contracting gigs.

Lol, your user name 'docker_up' reminds me of a hard-ass man espousing the masculinity trope of 'manning up' or 'MAN UP!' to some sniveling coworkers in an alternate business domain, but basically having your same attitude.

Have you started remote coding interviews yet?

I've done phone screens with coderpad/hackerrank if that's what you're talking about. That's the industry norm for several years now.

Kinda. How many phone-screens do you do before an onsite is scheduled?

Just one. I'm in SV and I can often get onsites skipped because I know someone and get a direct referral.

Nice. I would really like to talk to you more about your experiences through this process.

$400,000/yr in SV is peasant wage. One slip on the career ladder, and you'll be shooting up smack in a tent city like everyone else over there.

In a country where most people live like kings, why is everyone so determined to become a peasant?

Agree with everything else, but what company (even in silicon valley) is paying $400k total comp in the first year to a senior engineer?

400k TC is about average (if not low) these days for staff-level positions in SV. Getting those jobs requires studying hard, though.

Maybe after a few years with a lot of stock appreciation. I don't know of any company that will offer it straight-up. If you do, let me know and I'll consider switching right away.

Facebook, Google, Airbnb, Uber, Lyft. All of them easily offer 400k to L5s.

Yes, 400k is easily attainable as an L5/E5 at FANG. That's 200k base salary, 30k annual bonus, and $175k yearly RSU vesting (or about 750k initial grant). Those are definitely possible. Staff-level (L6) is about $250-300k, $50k bonus and $300k yearly vest at FANG. Senior engineers at Netflix make $600k or more per year in base salary only.

I'm not smart enough or ambitious enough anymore for staff but L5 is definitely doable.

Is Google really that much of a jump from L4 to L5? Their L4 packages are reportedly in the ±270k area (and my offer last year was well into the minus part of that range).

Also, and possibly related if the point above is the case, I have read from various Googlers recently that getting hired from outside at L5+ is really hard.

Low-end L4 vs High-end L5 probably is like that.

270k is somewhat low for L4. You can get hired as an L3 at like 225k