Tech Industry job layoffs looking scary

[Rick Fox at UNC]

the first thing you might want to comment on is that it should be written in c++. or better said COMPILED with a c++ compiler, written in c-like c++/



i don't think that would be what they are looking for. they would want you to explain how the c code presents efficiencies that python does not. memory management, pointers, contiguous values ...



which would be missing the efficiency point of the question.



no they are not. memory references are something which the industry has "in modern times" tried to get rid of. certainly memory references that are entirely the responsibility and control of the programmer.

pointers are a "foundational aspect" of legacy and ultra low level programming.

I brought up pointers because the poster mentioned them. And they are foundational. I can't imagine saying, "yea, I don't know about pointers because "modern times" don't demand I know about them." Even if that is the case, you prove you have an understanding AND THEN you discuss how "modern programming" (the term "modern" is sketchy here) is moving away from manual pointers, garbage collection, and so on. And then discuss why.

None of this is about what I think is right or wrong, it is about how to effectively interview at a higher level.

 

[JT-Money]

Thoughts @JT-Money

I wouldn't take seriously anything coming from Microsoft.

 

[Rick Fox at UNC]

you are 100% right and @Rick Fox at UNC is being disingenuous. anyone who has good IT dev industry experience knows that there are ALWAYS questions that an interviewer can as you that you don't know. there are always gotchas. that is the nature of technology and why manuals, stack and now AI are ever-presents.

it is always possible to design questions that an interviewee will near-100% not know or might stumble with. does anyone on earth (ex awk specialists) know complex awk syntax by heart? you can always dig deeper or further to trip someone up.

This is out of context.

The interviewee admitted to not going deep enough into the how. Said something dismissive like, "anyone can figure out the how." Again, I'm not discussing what i think, I'm discussing what works and what is effective when interviewing at a certain level.

All of this is out of context, so difficult to piece it all together again.

 

[Rick Fox at UNC]

your comments on coding didn't seem like a techie developer to me.

for example quant development is not like "FAANG on steroids". if anything FAANG is more technically intricate whereas quant stuff is more concerned with numbers and potentially but not always high speed.

I haven't made any comments on coding. I was responding to what others brought up.

I don't know what "high speed" means in this (or any) context; but low-latency, high-throughput systems programming and optimization is a specialty of mine.

The "high speed" you're thinking about is likely amateur hour. But who knows.

 

[null]

Maybe. Maybe Not. This goes back to, are you a serious person worthy of respect?

"If I sit down with someone for 30 minutes, they don't leave feeling like, you know, 'he's not serious' or 'he doesn't know what he's talking about' or 'he's not intelligent' or 'he can't communicate,' at the end of it, you know, they're fine."
- Damola Adamolekun

damola? is he a techie?

"What matters is, you become the person that you want to be, and you do the things that are important for you to become that, and you demand the respect of who you are. You gotta demand that yourself."

Going back to my response, the poster didn't know how to elaborate on what he was being asked and he didn't know how to properly communicate that lack of knowledge in a positive manner.

what are we doing here? facts or feelings? "positive manner" is the preserve of HR who do feelings more than subject matter facts.

Even in interviews where I ultimately didn't get the job, "you're extremely articulate, you should be teaching this stuff."

 

[null]

I brought up pointers because the poster mentioned them. And they are foundational. I can't imagine saying, "yea, I don't know about pointers because "modern times" don't demand I know about them."

now you are making stuff up. foundational to the discipline is not the same as foundational to your education.

techie precision missing from your answer here.

Even if that is the case, you prove you have an understanding AND THEN you discuss how "modern programming" (the term "modern" is sketchy here) is moving away from manual pointers, garbage collection, and so on. And then discuss why.

you used "modern" and i spoke using your voice.

None of this is about what I think is right or wrong, it is about how to effectively interview at a higher level.

which you failed to do by not focusing on efficiencies in your explanation of a "model" answer.

 

[null]

I brought up pointers because the poster mentioned them. And they are foundational. I can't imagine saying, "yea, I don't know about pointers because "modern times" don't demand I know about them." Even if that is the case, you prove you have an understanding AND THEN you discuss how "modern programming" (the term "modern" is sketchy here) is moving away from manual pointers, garbage collection, and so on. And then discuss why.

None of this is about what I think is right or wrong, it is about how to effectively interview at a higher level.

if they want to trip you up they can, which was the point of the OP.

i specifically explained how in my post.

explain why that is not the case.

i interviewed once for an IB role and the german chick who clearly didn't want to work with me, asked me about an obscure FO report topic that i knew nothing about.

i was not applying for a FO role.

 

[Rick Fox at UNC]

if they want to trip you up they can, which was the point of the OP.

i specifically explained how in my post.

explain why that is not the case.

i interviewed once for an IB role and the german chick who clearly didn't want to work with me, asked me about an obscure FO report topic that i knew nothing about.

i was not applying for a FO role.

A customer, cross-functional team, VP, Director, or higher can also trip you up.

"Hey man, that ain't on me, this person is trying to trip me up" is not the proper response.

There is nothing more to explain.

 

[null]

I haven't made any comments on coding. I was responding to what others brought up.

I don't know what "high speed" means in this (or any) context; but low-latency, high-throughput systems programming and optimization is a specialty of mine.

The "high speed" you're thinking about is likely amateur hour.

well let's keep it as objective and as technical as possible.

But who knows.

ok cool.

here is an EASY leet code problem.

write a c++ solution that gets time 100% i.e. the equal most efficient.

https://leetcode.com/problems/two-sum/description/

 

[null]

A customer, cross-functional team, VP, Director, or higher can also trip you up.

"Hey man, that ain't on me, this person is trying to trip me up" is not the proper response.

facts please.

no one said that.

There is nothing more to explain.

 

[Rick Fox at UNC]

now you are making stuff up. foundational to the discipline is not the same as foundational to your education.

techie precision missing from your answer here.



you used "modern" and i spoke using your voice.



which you failed to do by not focusing on efficiencies in your explanation of a "model" answer.

Didn't give a specific model answer, I gave a direction one could choose to go in when faced with a hypothetical interview question.

The point is the point. A certain level of depth is required to get into certain roles. This applies across industries, roles, and discipline.

Listen to skilled NBA or NFL players and coaches break down the game. Listen to a CEO break down his industry and company.

That's the ethic.

 

[null]

Didn't give a specific model answer, I gave a direction one could choose to go in when faced with a hypothetical interview question.

The point is the point. A certain level of depth is required to get into certain roles. This applies across industries, roles, and discipline.

Listen to skilled NBA or NFL players and coaches break down the game. Listen to a CEO break down his industry and company.

That's the ethic.

the fact is that IT is broad, deep and varied enough that it is always possible to trip someone up.

all that other stuff is interesting but does not change this basic fact.

that is what OP was saying and i agree.

i have been both interviewer and interviewee.

 

[Rick Fox at UNC]

ok cool.

here is an EASY leet code problem.

write a c++ solution that gets time 100% i.e. the equal most efficient.

https://leetcode.com/problems/two-sum/description/

This guy thinks he's interviewing me. Nothing could be further from reality.

Do that with some lame co-worker, wherever it is you work at.

 

[Rick Fox at UNC]

the fact is that IT is broad, deep and varied enough that it is always possible to trip someone up.

all that other stuff is interesting but does not change this basic fact.

that is what OP was saying and i agree.

i have been both interviewer and interviewee.

The person you quoted wasn't the person complaining about the missed opportunity.

That guy admitted he didn't get into the how, but still blamed it on the interviewer being asian.

As if asking how something works is a trick question.

 

[null]

This guy thinks he's interviewing me. Nothing could be further from reality.

i'm not interviewing you.

in fact it would be great if you were able to do it.

Do that with some lame co-worker, wherever it is you work at.

"co-worker" infantile germanic construction. surely you mean colleague.



but as we are sticking to facts i'll hold the invective and marvel at your perspicuity.