I was asking myself while reading the article, my god, what kind of job was he applying for, AP test author, programing language standard library author, puzzle book author, or what exactly?
I haven't gone into a cold interview in many years; its always previous relationship based now. Are cold interviews where no one already knows anyone, like that now, focused on weird algos and trivia questions and nothing to do with the actual job?
You're interviewing the workplace as much as they're interviewing you, and I'm smart but I have no idea how to evaluate a possible employer based on their selection of weird trivia questions. Something that at least vaguely relates to the actual job would be interesting.
Not nearly enough people realize this. If they're asking you corny questions in the interview, how does that reflect on their company? OP said they didn't even ask him questions about his resume - just these corny trivia questions. If I was there, I would've asked how someone thinks this is relevant to doing my job at Google.
After the past three years I've done a ton of interviewing and have learned the only way to know if the company is good fit is to grill the interviewer on stuff that matters to you. I've had interviews at fortune 50 companies with people who had no idea who their competition was or where they wanted their IT department to be in 5 years. If you're not invested in your company, what makes you think I should??
The other idea that popped into my head is we could develop a new "secret geek code" for HN readers where asking candidates endless queuing theory questions means we're secretly warning the interviewee about long lines in the cafeteria, lots of tree data structure trivia questions means a warning about an intensely hierarchical management style, weird trivia questions about designing thread safe interrupt handling routines means you'll be pestered a lot when you're trying to work which you may or may not be cool with, that kind of thing.
General etiquette for this sort of sitch seems to be to allow the person with more leverage to lead. Most of the formulaic/cold interviews I've had they'll get to the end and then ask you if you've got any questions.
Hmm... I'm unemployed that means they have leverage, I'm employed and looking that means I have the leverage?
Now that I think back over the years, as a stereotypical break the ice event is at the start of an interview, they usually thank me for taking the time off from work, at which point I mention I burned a vacation day to meet them and I've only got X left this year, at which point I tend to feel a little arrogant, I'm burning a rare limited day off for these guys, they'd best make it worth my while...
I know they're just fishing to see if I'm ethical enough to burn vacation instead of calling in sick, or maybe lying about being currently employed...
There's also an aspect of norms to it - most commonly in terms of consistency because people generally want to appear reasonable.
Anyway, if you've already got a job, their position looks worse in that respect since you need them less. Though that doesn't necessarily give you any more leverage in terms of extracting concessions from them since your job doesn't necessarily make you a more desirable employee.
Though, for some reason, companies seem to hang themselves in that regard - placing a great emphasis on whether you're unemployed, (which, personally, I've never found to be a great predictor.) So, while it's not an 'of necessity' thing, it probably does convert into some leverage on your part for a lot of potential jobs.
It is, in a round about way, why it's generally better to try to bargain about wages after you've got some sort of buy-in established on their side. Since you'll have the greatest leverage once they've decided they want you.
Things that you can point to that you can quantify, that's generally a good source of leverage - especially if you're a contractor. Anything I do that I can hang any sort of number on, I write down to use in interviews - not all of it goes onto my CV.
Most importantly HR told me in advance exactly what to expect, and that is what happened. I wasn't expecting much discussion of my experience or previous projects - but the algorithm questions turned up right on schedule, and they were on the topics I'd been told to review.