All my career rejections | Hacker News Reader

All my career rejections

web.eecs.utk.edu

228 pointsazhenley212 comments

I entered the professional workforce in the fall of 2008, as the recession was in full force. I had a college degree, but no experience or resume of which to speak - and frankly, didn't know very much outside of academia. I was lucky enough to land a job, but was laid off in fall of 2009. I was poor, sleeping on an air mattress, and in my early 20s, but determined to get a job as a software engineer, even if it meant taking a non software job for a while. This was before I knew that job-recruiters were a thing, or how to make connections with them, and before Linked-In had taken off. I made sure to apply for 10 jobs online, by going to companies "apply" pages, every-singly-day. I did this for two full months (weekends excluded). That's 400 applications. I only got 5 interviews, and only 1 job offer. That's 399 rejections.

I'm doing well now - but those were rough times for me. When my teenager feels rejected (e.g. not making the team), I always tell them that rejection is always a bummer, but not the end of the world. And I gently remind them of that story as a way of saying *"trust me, I'm not saying that as empty words; I do understand how it feels."

That is so similar to what happened to me, only I had graduated December 2006. So I had 1.5 years until it went south and got laid off. Luckily I had acquired a condo in that time at the market peak, so I had a place to lay awake at night and worry about how I'd pay the mortgage.

This right here is the goods... only thing that would make this better is if it was a variable interest mortgage

80/20. Everyone, parents, agents, closing lawyers all told me I was making the best decision of my life. All were saying they wished they could go back in time and buy a house when they were 24. Ended up taking a 30k bath on it 5 years later.

Rejection is a strong word to use when some algorithm didn't find the keyword it was looking for. Not getting an offer after interviewing isn't really so bad either since it's a learning opportunity where you get to meet people and ask questions. Before covid it usually meant you got a free vacation too.

Yeah, not in 2008.

That was a rough time. I worked at a start-up company that shut down just at the peak of the global panic. Forget rejection - even finding a company that was hiring people was hard. Everyone was freezing new hires, investors were running away from signed deals, etc.

To make matters worse my employer did not pay me my last paycheck and severance pay required by law, I didn't have a lot of savings, my wife was fired the next day, we just had a baby, and we didn't have a car anymore because that was a company car.

In the end it turned out okay - I managed to get a couple of offers within a week, ended up taking a job which paid 30% less as did my wife, we moved to a cheaper city, got a cheap car, and after a while the market started recovering and I found a better job. But man, that was traumatic. Some of my colleagues from that company were unemployed for many months.

Sounds like you've never been unemployed during a global recession.

I entered the workforce at the same time. I don’t have kids so I can’t relate to that aspect, but I speak to lots of college students and career-switchers and like you, I always note that I’m coming from a place of knowledge. I’ve been mentoring a lot of recent grads over the last year and with the pandemic, the uncertainty in the job market is very reminiscent of 2008 and I know what it was like to graduate into a pit of “what am I going to do?” And the answer is usually, “it’ll be fine. Probably.”

Pretty much the same situation for me back then too. But I wasn't in SW. So I did ~2000 applications before finding a job. Even in the late before-times, it would take ~6 month to ~1 year to get something lined up. SWland has it very easy when it comes to looking for work.

I did something similar last year after getting rejected by FAANGs and few more other tech companies.

- Google rejected 3 times.

- Facebook 2 times.

- Amazon(AWS) 1 times.

- Adobe 1 Times.

- Twitter, Github, stripe and others won't even consider me good enough for an interview.

- Dozens others companies, who do FAANG style interviewing.

I fear rejections, no matter how much I "try" to act normal. I was looking forward to working on some new projects and with talented team members, I never got that opportunity and its heart breaking. I been working on solving leetcode problems. But sometimes can't even solve Easy problems and its just so demotivating. Specially, when I get an automated rejection response without any additional feedback.

I have realized that maybe I'm not a rockstar coder that can come up with high performance code. I'm ok, I can figure shit out! and I think that's fine.

BTW actual feedback from an technical interview,

"I would encourage XXX to use some coding challenge practice websites to become comfortable with producing quick working code segments which would help him feel comfortable and produce code quickly in future interviews."

Unbelievable!

Not a critique, just an observation. I could be totally wrong.

> I would encourage XXX to use some coding challenge practice websites to become comfortable with producing quick working code segments

contrasts with

> I have realized that maybe I'm not a rockstar coder that can come up with high performance code.

What's your analytical process like? Do you take a moment to sit back and just think? Don't dive directly into the code.

My most successful candidates spend five to ten minutes thinking about my problem and talking themselves through it before writing any real code. They'll sometimes take notes with class diagrams or ASCII diagrams.

You don't have to have an optimal solution first.

Good question. It seems I lack speed implementing an optimal solution. During my initial FAANG interviews, I have had gone totally blank on my thought process and code. After few interviews, I don't actually dive in coding. I spend at least 10minutes about the problem and explain how it can be solved. I have realized that the interviewer is not looking an optimal solution at first. However, they're not satisfied with till the optimal code solution actually works.

In my experience, to be better than the vast majority of candidates you don't need an "optimal" solution, you need to have written something that actually runs within 20mins or so (even if it's incomplete), then work on improving it afterwards

> You don't have to have an optimal solution first.

The problem is that they still want that optimal solution in the 30 minutes given to you. There’s no point in thinking about it unless you already know what they are looking for.

Whoever thought up that alghorithm the first time certainly didn’t do it in 30 minutes during an interview.

> The problem is that they still want that optimal solution in the 30 minutes given to you.

This is only half true in my opinion. A lot of the interview questions I've gotten are pretty straightforward, for example given two lists of length M and N, brute force searching their product space is O(M*N), but if you sort one list the complexity reduces to O(NlogN + MlogN). I get the impression that the interviewer did expect me to sort, and writing code to do that was good enough.

On the other hand everyone shares stories about the really hard "gotcha" problems with clever optimal solutions. I've only been given one of those[0], and I did not come up with the optimal solution but I still passed the interview. I wrote a halfway solution that was better than bruteforce and I explained why any attempt I'd make to remove terms from the big O expression wouldn't work (obviously I could remove more if I was clever enough or given unlimited time).

So I would sum up my experience with they expect you to do better than brute force within 30 minutes, and to give them an intelligent conversation. I don't think this is easy, but it's not as impossible as you make it out to be.

[0] https://techdevguide.withgoogle.com/resources/former-intervi...

> I don't think this is easy, but it's not as impossible as you make it out to be.

How fast are you going to come up with sorting one or two lists if you don’t already know this is an option?

If I ever run into a situation where I need to do it in real life, it takes me all of two seconds to find, so the only thing being tested is if I’ve ever done that before (and still remember).

> How fast are you going to come up with sorting one or two lists if you don’t already know this is an option?

Why would I not know this is an option? The word "sorting" appears in every single study guide I've seen. It's used as part of a solution in a large number of practice problems. I'm legitimately curious about what study materials you've used that leaves you uncomfortable with sorting.

EDIT: I might've misunderstood your question. When Amazon asked me this interview question, I'd never seen it before and didn't know beforehand what to do to solve it. I thought to try sorting a list within the first minute of working on it, because that's what you do with Leetcode style problems. I had prepared before the interview, so "let's try sorting" was not a stroke of brilliance it was a basic attempt to use a common tool.

> I don't think this is easy, but it's not as impossible as you make it out to be.

There are many things which are easier for you but others take more time to do the same. This doesn't mean the person who does it within 30min is any better than the other who does the same in 2h.

You think that’s unbelievable? I’ve literally had a company recruiter tell me that I should probably spend a few hours on leetcode and hackerrank before the interview.

That turned out to be predictive, because they rejected me mostly based on my inability to do well on those kinds of tests.

I got a life people. Between taking care of my son, wife and work, where am I supposed to find ‘a few hours’ to spend on something that is solely meant to do good on your company interview.

It could theoretically have been worth it because of increased compensation, but something in me just screams nooo whenever I consider it.

why do you expect to pass an interview without preparing for the interview?

Maybe in the hope that the interview would reflect the actual work that needs to be done, which my education and previous work experience have prepared me very well for.

Then I'm happy to prepare for the interview in the sense that I try to learn as much as possible about the company and the people I'm going to meet.

Copying this response from my older comment:

The rampup at FAANG can be brutal and you'd be doing lots of learning even after getting in. The leetcode style interviews are designed to select people capable of studying and materialising broad problems in depth and scope under time constraints. They are also objective and can't really be faked nor you can talk your way in like in most banking/finance IT jobs. I was of similar opinion at some point but these realisations made me change my mind and I've come to like leetcode interviews. But I also think they only make sense in FAANG scoped companies where all the stack is proprietary. Small companies or companies using opensource tools don't really have this rampup and are doing such interviews mostly because others (FAANG) do it.

They select people who have a lot of discretionary time. I guess that is ok, if you want an organisation consisting mostly of young people without family that are happy to work weekends and evenings.

I’m very happy to be in a position where I can do most learning during company time, and then spend my free time with my wife and kids.

I can definitely agree, IT industry sucks in the sense that you're sort of expected to always be learning to stay relevant in the job market, and on your own time at that. We don't expect dentists or lawyers to have their job be their hobby but in IT... Here we are.

The assumption that leetcode is the only way to know if people have learning capabilities is weird. My job is a semi niche industry (semiconductor manufacturing equipment), most people who enter here need to go through a brutal ramp up. There are ways to assess learning ability without asking people to make interview preparation their part time job.

Edit: Anecdote time. The best interview I ever had was for my current job. It was a hour long where they gave me 1 design problem to solve. It was an open problem but the interviewer kept introducing new information. "Lets say the speed of stage cannot exceed x", "what if the wafer cannot take the stresses you will generate?", etc. I think that showed both my design thinking and the ability to assimilate new information in my mental model.

FAANG typically has 3-6 30-50 minute back to back interviews, the style of interview where they ask open ended questions is almost always included too...the leet code stuff is in addition to that. I can agree it's not ideal but these big companies do it for a reason and apparently it works for them.

If design thinking can be assessed through open ended design questions, what is leetcode adding? Except proficiency in leetcode?

The selection is a filter for people who are willing to pour massive amounts of free time into preparing for a small subset of companies. It's a great filter if you want someone who obsessively wants to work for you and is willing to sacrifice a significant amount of their personal time for it, but not so great a filter of their competence beyond a basic level.

Leetcode is a memorization/trivia exercise, not a reflection of someone's deep understanding of proper coding practices, software architecture, and ability optimize in real world cases (since in the real world you can use google and use whatever libraries you want).

I think you are genuinely curious. The point here is, people are confident that they can do the job, just can't pass the interview. The purpose of the interview is to select someone to do the job, not to pass the interview. "Preparing for the interview" is chasing the wrong KPI for both parties. Companies don't want someone who can pass the interview, they want someone who can do the job, they are not the same things.

However confident people are hat they can do the job the point of the interview is to convince the recruiters.

That's the game and the recruiting company sets the rules.

Thats the point though. The recruiting company rules seem to be suboptimal and infact optimizing for something unrelated to that job.

Edit: Fun example. Its like recruiting companies are trying to hire for the next big chess tournament and their criteria is how fast someone can win practice end game scenarios. It might seem fine on the surface, but the truth is end game is only 10% of the game.

> to convince the recruiters.

The employer is the one with a skills need. Arguably, I'm in need of resources. However, coding shops are a dime a dozen. I know I can build and ship software. I've proven it to get where I am today. I'm not too interested in proving it to someone who will forget my name in a week. I've also proven I can lazily apply to places, ignore interviews with this coding challenge mess, and pay attention to the shops that actually talk to me about my strengths and their needs before anyone opens a CLI.

So, is there a STEM shortage? If yes, then the recruiters and companies are the ones hurt by the 'convince the recruiters' mindset. If there isn't, then I'm hurt by being less competitive. Who knows what the future will look like, but despite all the language and shenanigans to the contrary, I know my company needs me more than I need it.

The recruiting company sets the rules for their own interview process, and most developers have an abundance of companies to choose from.

Obviously, the whole complaint is that the rules they set are a poor indicator of future employee performance. Yeah, they can set a rule that whoever is the most physically attractive gets the job, but again, it's a very poor indicator of employee performance. Do you follow?

idk, seems to me weird to go to an interview without preparing for days/weeks for it.

It doesn't seem weird to you that the skills you need to prepare for the interview have nothing to do with what the job actually entails?

Some delta between these two is true of all professions. How is the employer supposed to know what your skills are? Assessing this is a skill and there are only badly flawed tools available.

Every time this kind of argument is made, I am tempted to remind people that all other professions do without this kind of thing (except finance I think). But then I remember only FAANG type companies require skills, bridges are built by randomly selected people.

And those fields will have plenty of capable people who don't get a shot with the best firms because they didn't go to the right schools, or know the right people, or use the right buzzwords on their resume.

The coding screen is a less dirty shirt in a pile of dirty laundry. At least it's an objective measurement, even if it doesn't measure precisely the right thing.

You think that’s unbelievable?

Google and Facebook recruiters told everyone at my university they expected people to spend 2-3 months of several hours a day leetcode type practice before applying. This was said in a panel type "how to get a job at FAANG" seminar for graduating seniors, with actual Google/FB SWEs present, and all nodding in agreement that this is the norm.

That time investment sounds like a tragic loss of open source development and random curious exploration by students.

Maybe also quite a few lost innovative startups, which might've been spun out of students making things they want to make, rather than grinding just to prepare for interview rituals.

It can be a massive fun too. Ive never interviewed at FAANG, but solving some leetcode problems (mostly medium-hard though) was so cool for me and some of my friends. We were into olympic math at school, and I don't consider that a waste of time as well.

Good point. Practicing those exercises for sports-like competitions sounds great for people who want to do that for its own sake.

But there seems to be a large societal opportunity cost to everyone spending several months practicing doing that on a whiteboard, specifically for job interviews.

It's fun but for the most part boils down to software trivia, similar to Quiz Bowl. The key to succeeding with leetcode on the harder questions is memorization of things that frankly anyone can google up pretty quickly. It's a poor reflection of actual work.

Lol, you win ;)

That sounds terrifying.

I think it's definitely worth it for some people, at least financially. But many many others will study for months just to find out they can't make it no matter how much they prepare. I mean they accept how many - 2% of applicants? If you can look at it as a learning experience that's fine as well.

> If you can look at it as a learning experience that's fine as well.

A gambling addiction is also something you get from (in)appropriate learning experiences.. I think Nordvig's view of programming and materials that fit a longer view of learning good style are likely to work against getting a job in this climate. You are more or less demonstrating your willingness to embrace the anti-patterns a company holds dear to the point that you could be stuck with them without even being considered for the job.

Having a life means that you should love a standardized interview format. There's nothing worse than project assignments from companies asking 'for only a few hours' with descriptions that very clearly ask for multiple workdays.

Algorithmic interviews also compensate you better. Being able to prepare for multiple interviews at the same time means that you have a broader range of options to choose from and can play them off of each other.

Home assignments at least test your actual ability to write code or complete something that somehow resembles real work. Whereas solving whiteboard / live codility questions under stress with some guy looking at everything you type is a lot about how well you are under stress and how used you are to solving codility questions.

Perhaps. But from the employers perspective home assignments carry a much higher risk of cheating

I suspect with some startups is to do with the ecosystem. At first glance it makes no sense your tiny no-name startup adopts a FAANG interview process; it's like running a US Marine bootcamp for your local cub scouts. However the best realistic (non-unicorn) outcome for a VC-backed startup is a FAANG aquihire, and the acqusition process may depend on the pedigree of your engineers and their ability to pass a leetcode interview as part of some pre-acquisition technical audit. Things like being able to execute on good architecture and design and overall code quality - the mark of experienced developers as opposed to newly-minted CS grads - are of lesser importance, as the product itself will probably be quietly shelved in a year. In other words the FAANGs see the startup ecosystem as a cheap recruitment funnel, so it makes sense for founders to optimize their interviewing process around that.

> the acqusition process may depend on the pedigree of your engineers

I doubt it. Investors care about sales, growth etc. If they really care about the technology itself they'd probably look at the CTO / tech leads and thats it. I don't see how some developer's interviewing skills matters to the bottom line.

A normal interview process probably costs 4-5 hours just to do the interviews. People often travel for them. You spend all day doing your job for years on end. A few hours of prep doesn’t sound like a big deal, especially since that prep translates to other companies as well.

Reduce your daily TV watching and/or social media interaction by one hour, and you now have one hour a day to do this. Aim to get a remote job so that you save another hour or two from the daily commute. I did this. It works.

Small startup doing FAANG style interviews is like a small startup adopting microservices for their 3-developer team. More red flags than a Soviet May Day parade.

Yeah I never got it. Don't they at least wanna make sure the candidate knows their current tech stack? many of them don't seem to care. The ones that care are usually very small companies where every hire is super critical. The bigger the team, the less important the hire is, the less they care about the actual work that needs to be done.

The thing is, when I've seen code written in startups that have a "leetcode" process, it's ... not great. Lots of premature optimization and code review bikeshedding and not-invented-here, while having big issues around perhaps more important things like security, API design and database performance.

Yeah I agree. A lot of it is coming from CTO's, tech leads. It feels like that for them to justify their salaries they will push for "cutting edge" solutions like graphql, micro service architecture and stuff like that. Many times completely unneeded.

Do u feel u improve or just get less confident after a failed interview? I sometimes actually improve after a bad technical interview but if the interviewer is impatient/nasty it can really decimate my confidence and hurt the chances I'll try again soon.

I'm trying to kickstart a job search website that allows you to find jobs with an interviewing style which you are comfortable with (in addition to a commute distance that you are comfortable with, seating arrangement, pay rate, work hours expectation, automated productivity monitoring, etc.)

My hope is to get enough developers to create (free) profiles that the website can put some backpressure on the industry, however small, to curtail some practices that engineers dislike. There is so much demand for software engineering labor, after all. I'm sure this won't make a dent in the large software companies that have their own internally-hosted job board + cachet, but any difference in a positive direction would be good.

The website is here: https://sievejobs.com

FWIW, just from loads of recent experience, there are still quite a few teams that will hire you based on your demonstration of some real-world software development ability.

And I'll also add, that I really like your simple phrase "FAANG-style interviewing." It's more succinct than any I have been able to come up with: "Whiteboard + algorithms?" "Non-real-world Leetcode puzzles?" etc.

Interesting to see the differences in people. I've had a long career with very few rejections, but it has a lot to do with the fact that I don't apply to places unless I am really confident I am definitely going to be the best candidate, and that's generally been true.

That said, I encourage folks on my team to interview regularly just to know how to value themselves and to see that there are other opportunities, and to just get practice interviewing and learning how other companies run the process.

My rejections:

- laid off from Red Hat post dot-bomb (I wasn't really trying to stay at the time) ~ 2003

- rejected for a sysadmin position at Blizzard in around 2003 or 4?

- rejected from a lot of PhD programs in Physics (I wasn't really trying that hard, see a theme, it's called cognitive dissonance!) ~ 2008

- fired from Quora (honestly really just ended up misaligned with my boss and career goals, they made the right call) ~ 2014

- rejected from Stripe with two personal referrals after the last stage of the interview. I was pretty bummed by this and had spent a month putting all my eggs in one basket to work there. This was 2014 so I also missed out on a nice bit of stock to be honest!

At my current company I feel like I finally had enough continuity to specialize a bit and become an expert in a field to feel comfortable with what ever may come next. I hope others can find that in their careers too.

It looks like it's pretty common to go interview just to "keep the skills sharp." What do folks think of this practice? I feel like I would have a hard time doing it while hiding my true motives. And what if they make an offer?

I think practice interviews are a thing but people generally do it only when they're actively in the process of moving jobs.

e.g., I want a job at Facebook, so I'm going to go interview at some random startups first for sharpness.

I haven't heard of anyone actually taking that advice literally and just randomly giving out interviews even when they have no intention of actually moving from their jobs.

I've always wondered about this too - I feel like I am wasting their time.

> And what if they make an offer?

I guess you choose whether to accept it or not. An offer does not oblige you to accept.

I wouldn't feel that way. I'm one who did this for a while(at least, pre covid).

The fact is, they could offer you an amazing package that will change your mind. Or, they could offer you something you expect but know you wouldn't take. Both are OK.

I'd only think of it as a purposeful waste of time if for some reason you absolutely know you cannot take the job, regardless of anything.

Just be honest with yourself and them. Say that you have a job that you are happy with, but assessing other opportunities. If they make an offer, you should be able to decide if it's right for you or not and move truthfully from there.

If they make an offer that’s motivating, you say yes and change jobs.

Here’s how to align: even if you are not interested in joining, let them know what you would leave for, or a ballpark. If it’s way unaligned then just don’t continue past initial calls.

I’ll be disappointed if I make an offer and find out they leveraged it for a promotion, but usually you don’t have to tell them anything. You can always say you just want more money and every company has a budget.

You can also just keep in touch. Most folks who would make an offer are happy to talk to you again later or even further along in your career.

I now have hired two people who I sent rejections to after four years!

Some folks will frown on this but here is my philosophy: the company holds all the power, this is you as an individual developing an understanding of that system so it’s not at all unfair, since it started unfairly tilted against candidates - not everyone will agree, but the good news is that you won’t have to talk to the people who disagree again.

So I will give you my perspective as a hiring manager and as someone who has interviewed quite a few times in my career.

I personally encourage friends, especially those that have been at their job for 5+ years to go to interviews for roles they might find interesting, even if they have no plan of leaving their current role. I have been in the industry long enough to see companies cut ties with employees that have been with them for many years. If they are lucky it is not during a mass firing round, but if they are unlucky it is the result of a large firing round or worse yet a recession of some type. Job hunting and interviewing are at the end of the day a type of competition and if you want to be good at it you need to make sure you have practiced. The benefit of this, is if you make a point of going to interviews where you are still curious about the role, you may actually find your an unexpectedly amazing job and you also are more likely to get a much better offer than you ever would when you are actively looking.

Now when I am a hiring manager, I have zero issue if someone comes with the intent of it being a practice interview. Why? Well, my job as a hiring manager is to win over the candidate to the role I am hiring for. It starts with the one on one, to the exercise I give and to the overall process being a nice experience. If I do those things correctly and the candidate is good, then it usually doesn’t matter what their original motive was for interviewing, they walk out of the process saying I want to work with that person and I want that job. I think a lot of companies don’t understand that the candidates are choosing you as much as you are choosing them. At least that is the way it should be.

>I don't apply to places unless I am really confident I am definitely going to be the best candidate, and that's generally been true.

Same. I've been extremely lucky that the only layoff I experienced was on first job out of school and on the first day ("we hired too many people").

The worst rejection I experienced was for a consulting position with a Big 4 consulting firm 10+ years ago. I bombed the brain teaser/problem solving question in the last round (IIRC, why are manhole covers round?). I could tell the interview went downhill after that exchange. At the time I had no prior consulting experience therefore I really wanted to pivot into consulting with that opening.

Come to think of it, I have never asked any brain teaser questions like that in any of the interviews I conducted - maybe that's why. :)

>just get practice interviewing and learning how other companies run the process

I did it a few times but never felt the experience is comparable to looking for work "for real".

It's so they can't fall in the hole, but who asks a question like that in an interview anyway? Was it a civil engineering role?

"Why are manhole covers round" is an infamous Microsoft interview question.

https://wiki.c2.com/?MicrosoftsManholeCoverQuestion

My immediate answer would be it is because it eliminates a constraint. Thus placement is easier if alignment is not a constraint. Do not see much of a value in this kind of question except for amusement of the interviewer and check if the person is wired differently.

I could see it being a fun kind of question to volley back and forth and maybe get a sense of how a candidate thinks. As an interviewee I could probably have some useful fun with it, but as an interviewer I wouldn't use it that way; there are other, more relevant, questions which could serve the same purpose just as well.

If you only applied to positions you knew where the best candidate - how did you not feel that the job would not offer you new challenges or the position is too low?

I tend to keep interviewing or lets call it networking. The position I did fit a 100% I ended up declining as they were mostly position I thought I would go downwards in my career and pay, even if it sounded interesting.

Glad you found that place of continuity - still trying to get there...

> I tend to keep interviewing or lets call it networking.

Do you not find interviewing is super expensive in terms of time? My last interview was a four-day trip and about 40 hours of prep time before that.

If I interviewed more than once or twice a year it'd be an enormous time sink. Maybe it pays off for you because you think the networking benefits are so high?

I don’t think about it as kind of waste, it is training to be mentally fit and ready when I find a better role or simply when bad times hit.

Although 4 day trip interview is extreme, I would rather not go for unless they pay me. But things are even easier now, as most of recruitment is done remotely.

For me it was a few lucky coincidences.

I’ve never had concrete career goals, that’s step one of not being bothered by challenges.

Step two, I’ve always worked at startups in relatively emerging markets, which means they are inherently new and challenging and that has fed that challenge/growth that I seek even though not necessarily tied to career growth explicitly.

I’ve only started in my 40s to care about long term career growth, so go figure.

I think the short answer is I’m highly internally motivated and seek out challenges no matter what so it’s not a thing I usually worry about.

It works both ways. I've had jobs at FAANG and rejected an offer from a FAANG as well. I'm not that impressed with FAANGs anymore. I think one grows out of the need for validation after while. It's just business. I see interviewing largely as a sales function. Winning a sale with a prospect is a game of numbers. Of course your product (i.e. your skill set and track record) matters but there are many other confounding variables you have no control over. So stressing about any one job rejection is a bad idea. particularly when conversion rates are very low.

I get it, and I think we've all been hurt. But why keep this list?

I remember when I had a stellar year at a big corp. My manager said `nothing bad to report, wow`. I was ready for that S - a Special automatically meant a promotion.

A few weeks later, when the whole R&D got the performance letter, I received mine with a C. D usually meant `demitido`, or fired in portuguese. I couldn't believe it, and I kept that letter through many years, just as a reminder of how you can get screwed by things that are not in your power.

A few years later, when I saw the letter, I had a much better job, and was much happier. No good could come from seeing that letter from time to time, so I threw it away.

As long as these things are living in your life, they are consuming you. The sooner you let them go, the sooner you'll be free

There are many people that have a fear of rejection. A list like this helps to illustrate that it is okay to be rejected. You can be both successful, and have failed to nail an interview. The list seems purposely devised to help those who have that sort of problem, not as a list to remind him of his failures.

Agreed, it can help others.

I actually agree with both of you, if that's possible.

This is a very good comment. The fetishization of "failure" is a quite recent phenomenon that like many other communication workflows of the modern time has the implicit or explicit goals of making someone understood, commiserated, seen as naturally strong or "yes, I cried, but look how much stronger I am". A total waste of energy that to my eyes looks weak and entitled. Like when you read on, say, Twitter "my biology professor told me I had no chances of finishing high school, but now I have a PhD in molecular biology" - assuming it is true (and I many times doubt it is the whole story), are you really holding a grudge against a nobody in your life who said some words 15 years ago?

And that's why I use "failure" in quotes here and I never use the word in my life, except in some very specific contexts (e.g., machine failure). Anybody with ambitions in their lives gets rejected, dismissed and have things that don't work even if they cry in High Valyrian. Forget, move on, live large, not small.

Sorry for being nitpicky but a teacher talking like that could be very harsh and damaging depending on the child.

Quite the contrary. I understand the feeling and the downvotes. If I read my comment as written by someone else, I'd have a strong, negative reaction. What? They don't care about my failures? Are you saying that feeling down was for nothing since I cannot keep a list of them or talking about them on Twitter? It's like when I am reading and listening to Snowflake's CEO Frank Slootman: I don't like hearing what he's saying, and that's because I would like to be the one writing what he writes. But I am not him and I am not like him (for now, at least).

I believe that considering one's strengths and weaknesses rationally and logically, examining (briefly!) things that did not work out and rejections are all necessary to improve and being aligned. But keeping a list of and sharing failures like a cake at a wedding is weak. It is weak in form, weak in substance, weak in positive expected consequences.

Modern times, which are tremendously better overall than the olden times, have brought along for some reason—and especially in the US (and the Anglo world more in general)—this idea of being vulnerable and weak as being virtuous. So you have one day the failures, one day the impostor syndrome, the following day "whatever." But I don't find any virtue in that.

Since I am neither US nor Anglo, I remember, still with goosebumps, when a colleague of mine in one of the top tech companies in the Silicon Valley said during a group meeting: "Let me share some of my failures." And he went on with a list of "failed" projects and actions of absolutely zero interest for anybody. I remember the feeling of antipathy toward what I interpreted as either manipulation (please, I am weak, be kind) or tremendously low confidence masquerading as openness to criticism. What I expect from people getting a ton of money and status is: this is what did not work, that's why (if we know why), that's what we should be next time (if we know what and how). I am also looking forward to your comments and opinions. That is strong. Not sob stories.

You wrote: "A teacher talking like that could be very harsh and damaging depending on the child" -- It is the opposite, since I am not saying that "failures" are wrong, bad, they should put you down. On the contrary, I am saying that anytime we stretch ourselves (and lamentably, sometimes even the goal is easily reachable, because life is like a box of chocolate), we can miss, get rejected, lose. As it is inevitably part of the life of the achiever—and I hope (and work towards it) all my students will be achievers in some aspects of their lives—those "failures" (getting rejected by a romantic interest, a college, a company, etc.) should be rapidly and unequivocally forgotten. I mean, can you imagine keeping a list of all the men and women who rejected you? I am already feeling the testosterone dropping like a boulder in the ocean.

I was rejected by at least 50 high-level jobs for which I felt qualified. But the problem is that for those high-level jobs, other people felt equally qualified; maybe those candidates were better or had different competencies; maybe the company wanted someone better looking or of different ethnicity. Let's try to get some material for future endeavors and then move on. That's life for achievers.

Anecdote, yes. Read what Floyd Mayweather said in the criminally underrated "Winners", by Alastair Campbell (there is a reason why the book is not called either "Failures" or "Losers"): "The key quality for a winning mindset is believing in your ability to win. From a young professional in boxing, I believed that I would end up being a great fighter and throughout the years I have done everything necessary to get there. If you believe you can do it, then everything else falls into place.". I don't see the impostor syndrome and I don't see the list of rejections.

> I remember when I had a stellar year at a big corp.

What made the year stellar?

KPIs

I wouldn't do this and keep it around. We have all had rejections, particularly in these highly competitive times but the trick is to forget about them after doing a quick postmortem and learning any lessons. The reason is that psychologically we are wired to focus on the negatives and ruminate endlessly on it leading to self-doubt and a sapping of self-confidence. This is absolutely not good for long-term psychological growth and by extension, your life.

There is also the fact that "recruiting" methods are pseudo-scientific and do not reflect the candidate's ability (outside of very narrow specialized fields) at all. People also tend to make biased snap judgements if you display your failures/faults rather openly. Always project your strengths and don't advertise your faults.

PS: Read The Pocket Oracle and Art of Prudence by Baltasar Gracian trans. by Jeremy Robbins (aka The Art of Worldly Wisdom) for some pragmatic approach to life.

Am I supposed to forget that the vast majority of companies find me unhireable?

In a sense, yes. The trick is to analyze the event (i.e. the attempt and the failure) to learn lessons for improvement and not allow it to be a reflection and definition of you. Are you applying for the wrong type of jobs, are you preparing for the interview properly, how do you distinguish yourself from the crowd, are your expectations too high, are you willing to settle for lower pay, are you networking properly etc. etc. are all parameters which you can tune to give yourself an edge. You have to learn to "Hustle" (not meant in a pejorative way).

Tips to distinguish from the crowd?

Do a google search for "how to stand out from the crowd in the job market". Among the ones which came up https://www.job-hunt.org/ , https://www.job-hunt.org/job-search-navigation/job-search-na... seem more relevant.

You have to work on your ability, specialize in something and advertise it strongly. There is something i call "increasing the surface area of your luck". It is not enough to just know a language/framework/tool/etc. but you need to go "under the hood" which a "normal" engineer would not bother about eg. knowing how to write multithreaded code but not knowing how SMPs/Caches/Memory Barriers etc. work is not good. You also need to phrase your CV in such a manner (i.e. not a simple list of what you know/done) that you grab the reader's attention eg. instead of saying "i am a experienced C++ programmer" say something like "C++ multi-paradigm programmer with the ability to span all levels of abstraction". Finally, you will be surprised what wonders engaging persistently with Recruiters/Companies/Clients can get you i.e. don't take an initial "no" for a final answer.

How do you do that though when you mostly get no other feedback than a generic “we’re sorry but we focused on a more suitable candidate instead of you”? What makes a candidate more suitable? What am I missing? What should I work on to be a more suitable candidate to your company? You never get these answers so you keep guessing and shooting in the dark... coming nowhere closer.

If 99% of the people in the world despise you, that leaves over 70 million that don't.

You should see it like this: There's way more candidates than there are positions. Look at Linkedin, even some unknown startup gets 50+ applicants (and that's only Linkedin, they probably have other channels for hiring). Now the famous names you are competing against hundreds. So yeah, don't sweat it. You and me are both unhirable for many positions as are most everyone else.

> People also tend to make biased snap judgements if you display your failures/faults rather openly. Always project your strengths and don't advertise your faults.

I believe one of the ideas behind this list is to help overcome the culture where you are supposed to hide your failures. Not a bad thing for a self-confident person, as the author probably is.

Of course for someone who feels so much depressed by their failures that they can't stop thinking about them over and over doing that might not be the best therapy.

The article/blog post itself seems a bit pointless, minimal content and comes along as more of a humble brag. However I guess it triggers discussion so it's not without value entirely.

I have experienced countless rejections. Tens to hundreds every time I switch jobs. After just a few of these, you realize no one knows how to hire and just laugh at the absurdity of this profession.

Ooohh you sound like you could out humble brag them. Humble brag off!

It has that 'if I can do it, you can too' that people who don't know how the world works but base their life around what other people are doing/saying absolutely love, because it gives them hope.

The more people sharing 'started from the bottom now we here' without mentioning the likelihood of it happening, the more people love it. Delusional, yet simple self serving beliefs have a snowball effect without fail - I'd wager Western culture is almost entirely made up of them at this point, which has some interesting consequences.

> The article/blog post itself seems a bit pointless

Pointless? No. I'm sure it's reassuring to anyone who doesn't understand the high amount of rejections when looking for a job.

They did not list a high number of rejections though. Reading through it my first thought was “That’s all? What a weird flex!” In my maybe 20 year career I’ve probably been rejected hundreds of times. So much of tech interviewing is spraying and praying, and everyone is so picky. I’ve been rejected more than five times at a few distinct companies! The author listed shockingly few, unless he’s just giving us the highlight reel.

I've been accepted to most of the positions I've applied mainly because I avoided FAANG companies for fear of rejection. I was getting regular emails from their recruiters but just kept deleting them.

One day I just decided to reply to the Google recruiter. I stupidly set up the interview ASAP at a time when I was out of the country with no computer or internet. So I went into the interview with zero prep. It was a disaster.

That experience made me once again ignore FAANG recruiters for a while until I was pressured by a friend to apply at Amazon. I crammed hard for that. I thought I aced all the on site interviews with optimal solutions and stupidly told my folks that I likely got the job (bad idea!). I didn't.

Finally took a stab at some tier 2 companies in NYC and was rejected by all. Some were really close others were just bad timing (WeWork during IPO fiasco).

I'm still chugging along working at some company with no name recognition. Yeah it sucks that all my peers work at FAANG and don't understand why I'm not trying to work at a more prominent company. Honestly it worked out better. I have a minimal commute, a decent home in an area with great schools, comp comparable to FAANG, and finally my work has a much greater impact at my company.

fwiw, there is substantial randomness in the process (worked at two of FAANG myself). Try to do mock interviews with your friends if it helps. You may be showing patterns that you think is correct, but actually quite the opposite (this is what happened with me).

The FAANG interview is hard dude. I feel like I could maybe get in if I took a 6 month study break for it which is totally unrealistic. I tried a few times at the top 10 companies (except ones I consider immoral) and even got pretty far at some (onsites that went decently) but I'm pretty happy at medium sized later stage startups doing my 9-5. It's not like working for the highest market cap company in the US is going to give your life any more meaning.

Good comment. There won't be any more meaning, arguably there would be less meaning in FAANG (I mean where will u have more impact: a 50-200 people team or a 100000 team?). The FAANG compensation though is simply insane and just having it on your resume is huge for one's career, that's why everyone wants it. But u can have a very nice career without working there, I mean most of us don't work there.

Yeah it's a huge time sink. The Amazon interview was in Santa Monica even though recruiter informed me I was interviewing for a position in NYC. It's hard to find time to prep with kids at home also.

The real dagger for me is that our company lost two of our worst performers to FAANG companies. I was mentoring both and some of their code would qualify for r/codinghorror.

I've worked with people that were rejected 3-4 times from the same place, before finally getting a job there.

Getting rejected doesn't necessarily mean "No, we will never want you around here. Do not apply" though it might feel that way.

Sometimes there are just too many (great) applicants to choose from. But who knows, that pick could be you.

I have been working professionally for 3+ years in a single company. I've been lucky to have got this job without a test nor interview ( I was an intern there, and they offered me the job before my intern period was up). Recently, I feel bored there and tried to apply to another company. Currently, I am in the last stage of the test and it seems I will be able to pass it. But, I feel nervous to actually change my job, because this will be my first time changing workplace, and I don't know if I will actually be accepted there (there is a probation period of 3 months). Reading this thread makes me re-realize that changing jobs was not an unusual thing. Thank you for sharing this.

> I don't know if I will actually be accepted there (there is a probation period of 3 months).

Depending on where you live 3-6 month probation periods can be completely standard. If you get the job, you are accepted there. The probation period is just a window in which you and the company can separate with less friction. In most places it's a formality that you shouldn't worry about unless you're extremely underperforming or doing something egregious at work.

Or your manager arbitrarily decides they don't like you (particularly in startup-like environments with limited process). It shouldn't happen, but it does.

My friend who has wider experiences changing jobs than me also said the same thing as your comment and its parent. Workplace politics is a real thing.

Not only is it a real thing, at some workplaces it's the main event.

Some companies, that struggle to get candidates, seem to use the probation period as a way of being able to hire people without properly testing skills first.

Exactly same experience here. I made it. Changed my workplace for the first time after 2 years. It's something really nervous but if you think you need it, go for it. Your path is your responsibility. :)

Yes, our path is our responsibility. Even more when we have another responsibility in our shoulders (in my case, a family).

And how is it with your new job? Do you enjoy it being there? Or are you missing your old workplace? I am sorry if it is too personal

I had to accept a huge volume of rejection, both doing in job applications (hundreds of applications) and online dating (thousands). All the while being alone during Covid-19.

My advice to those who might be reading is to find a mentor or best friend who you can update on your progress on a semi-regular basis. Those people helped me so much to remain positive and upbeat during the really disappointing moments of 2020. They can also give feedback on your approaches.

The other tip is to accept it's going to feel terrible, but to let the disappointment that you feel flow through you to help move on.

I’ve been rejected 5 times from Google. And yet every year like clockwork they email me again asking to interview. At this point I just say yes every couple of years and try again because why not. I think I do well enough to deserve a call-back but never good enough to get hired (I made it to the hiring committee though).

I got rejected twice, and got an offer on my third try over the course of 3 years. If it's something your really want, don't give up. Also see the "interview anti-loop" http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2008/03/get-that-job-at-goog...

I’ve had that happen a couple of times. Do a video/phone call with an SME that goes really well... then it doesn’t.

The second time they were locking down a time I could fly somewhere and the whole thing went poof. Fortunately I was in a good job and it was no big deal, but it would have been very stressful if I was between gigs.

Throwaway because reasons.

I "failed" my first four (edit: onsite) FANG interviews. 5th time was a charm, have been happily employed with a senior title at FANG for a couple years.

Not exactly new information to HN, but the job itself is quite a bit easier than the interviews (wrt to technical knowledge). It can be just as stressful though (I actually think stress response / teamwork is one of the main things FANG interviewers are looking for after a certain bar of technical competence is met, YMMV).

This isn't for everyone, but if it's something you really want to do, don't let the rejections get you down. You'll get in eventually :)

Hearing stuff like this gives me hope, but still the experience is frustrating. I suppose for argument's sake, you can theoretically interview at each of the letters in FAANG every year. Just blew my attempt at the F for 2021, so trying to reach out to the rest of the letters (and some other companies).

Oh agreed it's super frustrating. A lot of times you won't even get any feedback with the rejection, which is incredibly demotivating and tbqh, infuriating.

> you can theoretically interview at each of the letters in FAANG every year

One of those letters will let you interview many times in a single year ;) (but not for the same role on the same team)

If I had any final advice for those intent on going through the interview meat grinder it is that while l33tcode can be useful, you'll still want to understand some of the why behind popular algorithms and not just have a ton of specific ones memorized. This will save you when you have to talk through a problem you're not already familiar with.

Skiena's The Algorithm Design Manual was more helpful to me than any other prep material in that regard.

Would that that be F & N? :)

I know you can interview at multiple roles at FB provided 1.) you pass the initial phone screen and 2.) the onsite loop is different - say, frontend vs. product/backend. Doesn't work for me this year since I likely failed the phonescreen...

I've heard in theory you can apply to multiple jobs at N too.

I interviewed multiple times for different positions at G two years ago. Two on-sites in six months.

Do you mind articulating how specifically Skiena's book helped you, and what was your approach? If I have to do Skiena's book cover to cover, it'll likely take few months.

Daimn. I kinda admire that yet at the same time wonder why you go through with it.

This is a very short list of rejections. In my opinion, anyone who wants to have a successful career these days ought to expect at least an order of magnitude more rejections than this over the course of their career.

The essence of this article is wonderful!

I've been rejected quite a few times as well. This is in fact so inspiring that I will apply for another job that I most likely will be rejected from as well.

You cannot win if you don't play the game.

Here’s a weird anecdote.

I don’t think I’ve ever gotten a job I applied for (with the exception of my current job which I suspect was tailored for me and a colleague.)

Nearly every job offer I ever got I was reached out to by a recruiter.

It seems like, if I apply, I get blacklisted, but if I don’t apply a recruiter reaches out later and I often end up with an offer. This has happened with small and large companies. Sometimes even the same job but after a year or so. (Apple, most notably).

Does anyone else have similar experience?

How do the recruiters find you on the internet?

I bet it's Xing or Linkedin?

Linkedin, mostly.

I’m in the same boat. I’ve never directly applied to the 3 jobs (including a FAANG) that I’ve taken in Silicon Valley. One found me on angel list and the others LinkedIn or direct email. Similar to you, the places I did apply to would never respond, even with referrals in some cases.

I don't want to sound like I am looking for pity here, but at what point, is it OK to give up? My first fail was back at 2009, a full interview cycle with Microsoft. After I was rejected by AWS a few weeks ago (also a full cycle interview, no offer), I realize that I have spent a decade, on and off, trying to get employed by big tech. Since I am not getting any younger, spent countless hours preparing, reading and re-reading Cracking The Code Interview, and I don't feel like I am getting any better or closer, I am looking for some closure. I believe perseverance is an important quality, but also, I don't want to spend another decade through all this. I have been always employed, in not so sexy corporations, but I have earned a living, raised my son, and supported my family, that still lives in a third world country, and without my support they would had been homeless years ago. Sometimes I feel like my efforts were more of an ego trip, just to show off how smart I am, that I was hired by Google. And that's where I am right now. I am unsure how to feel.

As a serial entrepreneur who has raised money a bunch of times, I have absolutely lost count of how many angels and VCs have rejected the companies I've worked for (or founded) and been a part of the process with. Now they just roll off my back.

Odd though how in other areas of life, rejections seem much more personal. I suppose there is a difference between a professional rejection vs a personal one.

One of the artists that revitalized part of Kansas City had all of his museum and gallery rejection letters as the wallpaper in his restaurant

Which artist / which restaurant? I’ve got a few hunches, I live in the Crossroads.

"Stretch" from Grinders

The more interesting part of the whole post was this last line:

"More rejections to come!"

That's the spirit! Never give up :)

Just got off a FB phone screen which I think I failed. Only got through one question, and even that required assistance from the interviewer. My understanding is that if you don't finish two problems, you're doomed.

Spent the past week basically taking time off from work to do leetcode problems nonstop. Too bad it didn't help.

Third time failing at FB. First time failed the phone screen in 2018. Passed phone screen last year but bombed the onsite. And now failed the third time on the phone screen.

Also failed at Amazon (onsite), Netflix (twice - once on the phonescreen, once on the onsite), Uber (twice phonescreen), Microsoft (onsite). Got offers from Credit Karma and WeWork...how I dearly wish those offers were from any of the other companies I had failed at...

Needless to say, I feel horrible.

Third time failing at FB. First time failed the phone screen in 2018. Passed phone screen last year but bombed the onsite. And now failed the third time on the phone screen.

Being rejected by Facebook in 2021 is probably a good thing

Truth is, I am not as enamored about the company as I was before, and that's what I tell myself, but it's still sour grapes syndrome. It would still be an astronomical step up for me careerwise. I would literally throw away my senior SWE status to join any of the aforementioned companies as a junior SWE level.

> I would literally throw away my senior SWE status to join any of the aforementioned companies as a junior SWE level.

Sorry to say it but if I was a hiring manager and saw someone with senior experience applying for junior positions that's a red flag to me and I would be thinking they probably have big confidence problems.

I don't do this, of course. I don't think companies/recruiters/HMs would even consider allowing me to. Although I think midlevel roles are more within reach (and many of the offers I've gotten were for such a level).

The big companies just level you. So apply as a senior or junior and they level you. It's about alignment to the group more than anything.

It would still be an astronomical step up for me careerwise. I would literally throw away my senior SWE status to join any of the aforementioned companies as a junior SWE level.

It’s still not worth sacrificing your moral compass, or if you prefer, your soul.

Join the data team or the enterprise engineering side. Or join as a solution architect. Maybe there's a business unit that needs software engineers but can't get them the normal way. Your senior engineer skills will go a lot further there than competing in the general engineering pool.

I know these positions exist in all companies. Find the unseemly but necessary work and deliver. The current CEO of Google worked on Google Toolbar and turned that into Chrome.

You could even go the contractor route for 2 years and try to lever that into a full time role.

The other thing way would be to spend a year diligently leetcoding...

My understanding and experience is that nearly all tech companies will still subject you to the whiteboard interviews for any role that involves coding, regardless of experience and even regardless of whether you have connections inside vouching for you.

I've had great pre-interview conversations with hiring managers discussing technical topics, several concluding with them saying that they'd love to have me on their team. Have had friends/excoworkers vouching for me sometimes. Then I go screw up on the leetcode interview, and that ends the story.

Pretty much have been drilling leetcode every day since my last failure at FB last year. (Bad) luck of the draw saw to it that I drew a question I couldn't tackle.

Some roles are less about technical brilliance and more about solving business problems and effective communication. Take a step back and ask why vs what.

Not sure I understand. Are you implying I should target roles like project manager, business analyst, etc.? If so, not really interested in anything that doesn't involve active coding quite just yet.

I did see a post somewhere about someone's recent experience getting jobs at tech companies with minimal to no leetcoding. However he states that the only way it was possible was because he already had FAANGs on his resume and some of these companies were willing to give him the benefit of the doubt due to this.

It's a good thing there are more than like 5 software companies to work at.

And most of the smaller ones, while less prestigious, are probably just straight up better places to work.

Of course. I will continue to interview.

That said, the number of companies I would be willing to jump ship to from my current job (despite my gripes about it) is not that large. Certainly more than FAANG, but I'd say < 100.

Every job I've ever had except one were for companies I had never even heard of before applying and usually in industries I'd no experience working in. One of the most rewarding parts of work for me is being able to shape the culture and future of a company even as an IC.

Forgive me for the observation but it seems to me you've put big name companies on a pedestal as though they are objectively better jobs and maybe have some blinders on in terms of the real scope of opportunity that is out there.

And if it's about pay, smaller companies can often pay well too.

I'm open to entertaining any company really, but ultimately the question it boils down to is: "Is the new job/company good enough that I'd jump ship from my current job?"

Not just pay of course, although I'd be lying if it wasn't a factor at all. I'd be willing to jump ship for the same (or even less) pay if other characteristics of the new company made it worthwhile.

I'm very curious what characteristics you place value on then, if you're placing FAANG companies at or near the top of the list. My impression has always been that they would be pretty shitty to work for.

Pay, Perks, People, Prestige, Projects, and just general work environment. Not necessarily in that order. Some of these are also subject to a sort of "compounding interest" for the rest of your career too that less known companies can't provide.

I'm aware things aren't perfect rainbows and unicorns there (or really, at any company). But the friends and excoworkers who've gotten into FAANG, and similar companies, absolutely love it. And not just for the pay.

> Forgive me for the observation but it seems to me you've put big name companies on a pedestal as though they are objectively better jobs and maybe have some blinders on in terms of the real scope of opportunity that is out there.

Except maybe for Uber, all those companies they listed failing at are objectively better at attracting attention to your resume than some no name, smaller company nobody's heard of.

I’m curious what’s wrong with Uber today?

>Needless to say, I feel horrible.

Is there a reason you want to get into those companies so badly? I personally don't practice leetcode, because my ROI on those types of problems is not really great, and I'd rather do things that I find to be more interesting with the time. This does mean that, when I interview, sometimes interviewers treat me like a child for not being able to reach optimal solutions for problems they know to be well known or simple. But I'm ok with that, because tech is an absolutely huge field, and there are companies out there that better fit me.

I mentioned this in another reply too, but the ultimate question is whether or not a particular new job/company is worth jumping ship from my current job.

I'd say little doubt, any of those aforementioned companies would be a "yes". I'm open minded about other companies - but again, it all boils down to that question. For Credit Karma and WeWork, where I did get offers, after interviewing there, the answer to that question I arrived at was "maybe" for the former (compensation was very lowballed), and "no" to the latter (weird culty vibes).

Not OP, but personally, the way I see it is the easiest way to break into “interesting” work (obviously that’s subjective as hell) because the sheer amount of work available and the biggest hurdle being leetcode, whereas at equivalent positions at non-faangs for certain type of roles the hurdle seems to be having multi decade experience in some domain / education/ etc.

Working in one of the companies OP mentioned. Don't assume that work at FAANG is automatically "interesting". You will do work others think is required for the company, "interesting" is never the key someone higher on the ladder is striving for.

If you want to work on interesting topics, start a side project and try to turn it into a company.

What is amazing about how difficult these interviews are is that these companies (not including Netflix) put out bad products. Amazon Fire - terrible hardware, terrible software, Microsoft Windows ME, Windows Vista, Windows 8/8.1, etc etc

> Only got through one question, and even that required assistance from the interviewer. My understanding is that if you don't finish two problems, you're doomed.

Different loops and interviewers conduct interviews in different ways. There is no "one problem" rule.

Usually the questions are structured in layers where there's many follow-ups available. Based on the question, the interviewer, the loop, they can ask one problem or more. Unless you are the interviewer, it's not clear how far into the question you've been and what the expectations were. It is common to ask two questions though.

Context: I have 300+ interviews at Facebook and been active in the whole process.

Would be jawdropping pleasantly surprised if feedback came back positive, but I'm not hopeful. I do understand that miracles happen though.

I completely, utterly, bombed my Microsoft phone screen - as in, I could not even get a basic brute force algo down. Yet I got invited to the onsite because the interviewer liked me for some non-technical reason.

You got offers from some pretty decent companies there, many many devs probably applied there and didn't get hired. Yet you feel horrible. It's very human what you're going through, but try to at least look at the positives as well.

We should all post ours here. I'll start:

* Google * Amazon/AWS (interviewed by Jeff Barr and tbh, I was starstruck) * Cloudflare * EdgeCast * Twitter * GitLab * GitHub * Linux Foundation * Wikimedia * DigitalOcean * Snyk

Since I began keeping track, about two years ago, I've applied to 605 jobs, rejected by 328, and the rest didn't even bother to send me a robo-rejection email. Is there any value in posting my list?

I like this. Simply because we don't emphasize our failures yet we should, to learn from, etc etc.

I've worked at over a dozen software companies big and small over my 20 years+ career yet I've gotten rejections about 50x more than I get offers. Like sales, it's a numbers game. The best jobs I ever had was working with folks I've worked with before or where there was really strong culture fit. Sometimes it's not your achievements but your personality, your goals, who you are that they reject. Keep going.

I’m not going to rattle off my own career rejection list (though I’ve definitely done in in talks I’ve given aimed at people about to graduate from college), but I really appreciate this post.

I don’t work in academia, but I know enough people that do to know how rare it is to be open about what is a very rejection-heavy industry, and I commend the author for putting that out there!

Very rejection-heavy is saying it lightly.

I’ve been incredibly fortunate to have few rejections in my career. Off the top of my head:

- Google (the feeling was mutual)

- GitHub, if you count no response as a rejection

- I likely would have been rejected by Microsoft, but I ended the interview early

That said, I’ve been even more fortunate to have established great working relationships with peers, mentors and mentees, which has helped me get all but my first job and the one I’m likely to start next.

In a sense, the amount of nepotism in the industry is probably a barrier to many, which I’m sensitive to. But these working relationships aren’t the only way to establish good connections. I’ve seen people do very well by just attending meetups related to some aspect of the industry they find interesting.

That’s still a barrier for people who don’t have the time to devote (or wait), but for anyone who does have the time and wants to improve their prospects I highly encourage giving it a try.

> but I ended the interview early

I wish I had the balls to do that. I mean sometimes u just know you bombed and there's no going back, like 30 minutes into a bad date. You just know. Yet there I am going through the whole 1.5 hours sweating it. Why not just say : Hey guy, thanks for the opportunity. I think we both know this isn't going well for me, good luck! Actually this can work for bad dates as well!

For what it’s worth, I wish I had walked out on Google. That was definitely one where I knew I wouldn’t be happy on the job.

And I wish I’d stuck it out with MS, at least as a courtesy. Even if I would ultimately have been rejected. I was mostly just disappointed in the particular interview style. I got to the last interview in the loop, by the team’s lead, and asked if he had any intention to have me do an exercise relevant to the (frontend) job or if it would be 4 straight algorithm/data structure exercises. He said the latter, and that’s when I walked.

Interesting blog post; a far more interesting aspect, for me and my personal career at least, is the companies and interviews where the company did a really poor job and essentially wasted my time and/or pissed me off.

Without naming names, here's a couple of examples:

1) FAANG company: interviewed and received offers at two distinct times, which I rejected. Both offers where missing exactly what I had asked at the beginning of the interview cycle (salary was lower than my current; seniority level wasn't what I expected).

Third cycle of interviews, years later - rejected because they thought I didn't have enough experience in that specific role (been doing it very successfully for 8+ years at that point). Close friends in the industry couldn't believe it.

2) fast-growing startup: first interview with CMO, hoping to get a CTO-like, executive position (not to brag but please trust me that I abundantly had all the necessary skills and experience). Then I get to an interview with a very junior lady. After 30 minutes in the interview, I realize that something is wrong. I ask her if this is intended to be an interview for a job where I would report to her... Someone just fresh out of college, with a couple of years of working experience in a non-relevant field/company. WTF.

3) Three very, very successful YC companies: applying for a job and not even receiving an opportunity to interview, despite the obvious good match between my profile and the job itself.

4) Flew to an interview with company in Silicon Valley (soon to be acquired by FAANG-like), on my own dime, from another state in the US (domestic flight, a couple hundred bucks, took an entire day off for that). The motherf-er who was supposed to interview me didn't even show up, and never apologized.

Please, don't read the above as me being arrogant or have too high an opinion of my skills or my profile (you're still free to think so); these were really situations where it was far too obvious that the company and/or the interviewer didn't have any idea of what they were doing, or did a really poor job at handling the job process.

In fact, I also had my fair share of situations where I was rejected, etc, in which I happily admitted to myself that the company didn't do anything wrong, and that perhaps I wasn't a good match there after all.

I can easily think of a few more situations like the above. These things used to piss me off so much. Now, in hindsight, I see these as ways in which I have learned more about the IT industry, and how appearances often don't match reality. Not at cool startups; not at FAANG-like companies.

Often I remind myself that interviews are a two-way street - companies forget this, to their detriment. You are there to impress them, but they are also there to impress you - do you want to spend the next few years with them?

Companies who forget this by putting obstacles in the way - e.g. several, progressively more absurd, interview cycles, arbitrary whiteboard examinations and so on simply put off the most qualified and experienced.

Worst interview question I ever had? 'What is your opinion of the actor Kevin Bacon?'. What, are we in primary school? I thanked them for their time and ended the interview early.

> I thanked them for their time and ended the interview early.

Absolutely brilliant response.

Too many companies don't realize that interviewing is not just about filling a position: it's also marketing and PR, and you are representing your company to the public. And the thing about marketing and PR, if it's not well managed then you can seriously damage your company's reputation, no matter how well you execute on everything else. Of course Google or Amazon are too big to care, but if you're a small company doing basic shit like turning up for an interview or informing later-stage candidates of rejections rather than ghosting them is kind of important.

What amazes me every time I read articles like this is that some companies are apparently so afraid of hiring the wrong people because that's costly - and at the same time they don't mind throwing abandoned projects that did cost millions of dollars on the graveyard every month.

Great comment. In fact, in a country like the U.S where it's so easy to fire people I don't see what the big deal is.

Success may only come once out of every 100 times you try. So you better get over failing and iterate quickly if you want to make it. Fail fast so you can move on.

Interviewing is a skill just like talking to women. you need practice before you will succeed. And practice necessarily means rejection.

People who are afraid to fail will never succeed. They put too much weight on a particular thing and then are crushed when it doesn't pan out. You have to get to the point where rejection and failure don't hurt. Just add another data point to your corpus of life experience. Then magically you start to succeed and your success will snowball.

This is such a hostile system. It keeps the market from clearing, both for jobs and for women. No wonder people drop out and play video games. I eventually got pushed past the fear of rejection when my failure-free factory job went sour, but my successful career since then shows it was a waste to put so much rejection in my way. The real world is Nintendo-hard, and that sucks.

This does seem to be a very short list of rejections from my perspective as a current CS student at a decent state university in the US. During applications season in the fall it's not uncommon for my peers to apply to between 20 and 100 job postings. This tracks for students seeking internships and those seeking full-time employment. This past year I applied to less jobs than I ever have and still applied to 16 postings (all of which I was reasonably qualified for, no FAANG) before landing my current internship. The year prior I applied to far, far more.

IMHO - Give me a coding exercise that is needed for a day-to-day life in the target job, I would take it & no hard feelings if I fail. I do not believe Google/Facebook engineers are solving Binary tree problems everyday. Future is all about ML models generating code for you. So you may not even program in the future. What we need is creative intelligence or common sense that you apply for a given situation. Everything sounds very hypothetical though :)

I find the amount of rejections "most" have to experience before landing a decent job somewhere, to be soul crushing and when life can already be very depressing.

It would be nice if one's ability was easily measured by a history of completions and then graded.

It would also be nice if life wasn't so competitive for surviving and for not ending up homeless. I pity the young generation that doesn't have real family that supports them until they make it somewhere.

Very interesting that your focus is "IDE research". Not sure I've encountered that before! One reason for the rejections may be that in industry, from what I've seen, dev and cloud tools are managed by more "soft skills" people. Masters in Psychology types may be more the candidate they seek. I suppose the thinking is that to gain mass adoption they have to be less engineer designed and more user friendly ;)

Funniest rejection I've gotten: I once applied to mid-size company and during the phone screen helped them understand the role they wanted/needed was actually a senior program manager position.

They later contacted me to thank me for helping them understand the role they needed to interview for. They adjusted the listing but said that they would not be bringing me in for an interview...

Thank you for your service; I wish you a lot more failures on your way to push the envelope in the space between fear and panic.

Very interesting. I think anyone with ambition has been rejected and its interesting to see how much OP is putting themselves out there. I chose to keep a list of all of the times I or my work has been recognized. I guess it comes down to what motivates you, but I'd rather not dwell on the times I've been rejected.

Kind of unrelated but I just accepted a software developer position at Microsoft (Redmond). Any advice?

I previously failed twice at Amazon and promised myself to never ever do another excruciating Amazon interview. My interview at Microsoft was super nice surprisingly, questions were difficult but not as tricky as Amazon.

I’ve had a lot of rejections in my career and I have learned that the best advantage I have that I can bring to an interview is my conversation skills. I may not be as good as another engineer on paper, but if I can get an interview that usually changes.

That list looks tiny. Have failed 10 interviews this year alone.

Yeah it is tiny. I just sent more than 10 applications during the holidays for fun with two failed onsites and maybe a third to show for it.

Reading the post and comments I realise that I have been very lucky so far in my 25+ year career. It’s good and humbling to see how hard it can be in general.

Good love to see more details on the Why rejects from them.

What's the deal? I can easily beat your results just sending my CV to all your list +1 random company.

Impira? The tiny startup led by a bushy-tailed twenty-something CEO? Why would the author apply there?! Did Impira even exist in 2013?

And... Kite? The Python refactoring plugin that's always mired in low-grade controversy and barely has any funding? Sure, interviews are a crapshoot, but... why?!

Possibly more interesting if information on acceptances was also provided.

His CV is linked in there.

The CV only contains a subset of all acceptances

Not to be harsh, but maybe this guy just isn't a good engineer / academic? This is why I switched from EE to CS, I found it far more interesting and could execute doing software stuff at a very high level even with my piss poor academic record. Never do something you're mediocre at, life just isn't going to be a good time if that's your approach. Tbh, if I was this guy I would've just switched industries and done something I was objectively better at. I quit EE because without a doubt I would've been a C-level electrical engineer at best.

I never thought I was bad at my job and I have equal/higher acceptance rates than my friends, but thanks for the vote of confidence! Rejection is very common in academia and I wish people talked about it more.

Thank you for writing about it! It’s very common in tech too but people don’t talk about that either (though academia is objectively more competitive; you have far fewer tenure-track slots, compared to even a major “elite” tech company that employs over 100,000 people).

It’s important for people to see that those who have succeeded have failed too.

I think that’s pretty harsh. Perhaps he’s not the best SWE candidate at a FAANG or FAANG-like place — but he’s in a tenure-track position at a school that is top 40ish for public universities (averaging both engineering and computer science in undergrad rankings), which is hardly something to “switch industries” over.

We do ourselves a major disservice by pretending that only having an academic position at the top five or ten schools or a job at one of the top five or six tech companies is the only way to achieve success.

> Never do something you're mediocre at, life just isn't going to be a good time if that's your approach.

What happens when you’re mediocre at everything.

I wonder if I copied this website style at some point. Mines identical.

interesting, but better to keep that list for yourself

Why? It would have helped me a lot when I was younger if more “successful” people shared this info.

50 times? those are rookie numbers in this racket

Reply on news.ycombinator.com