Hacker News Reader

> I don't care if you're clever enough to answer that;

Bingo.

To me, this is the kicker statement for the industry. Solving fake problems like nickel-in-a-blender is for the clever. But I sure as hell don't want clever code solutions; I want rock-solid, reliable, fundamental solutions.

Anyone who feels these questions are an indicator of programmatic success is measuring the wrong things.

View on HN

To be fair, the "nickel in a blender" type of problems have been actively banned from engineering interview at Google for many years. That doesn't mean that there aren't a few holdouts that still use them, but there is an active effort to eliminate them.

I sit on an engineering hiring committee and I can't really think of the last time I saw one of the ridiculous puzzle questions show up in an engineering interview. The WSJ article was pretty ridiculous.

Wasn't implying these to be solely a Google issue, but rather something that a material number of firms in the tech industry like to follow in interviewing.

Sorry, but I'm not familiar with the WSJ article you've referenced. Link?

I suspect it's the recent http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405297020455230457711...

Yes. That's it exactly. Thanks!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com