• Aboyd (unregistered) in reply to anony coward
    anony coward:
    If someone storms out of an interview because of a logic test, they may not have failed by missing the logic, but they did fail by not attempting to meet the requirements set.
    That's sort of like shouting "you're fired" at someone... after they've already said "I quit" and walked away.
  • vuk (unregistered) in reply to Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward:
    vuk:
    the player should settle with one of the players that each of them says the different color and split the money after the game.So you have 100% chance to win the half of the money.If the interview is for Microsoft ,than you can say that you will fuck up you fellow player after the game and took all the money.

    That doesn't even make any sense. Does anyone actually read the problem? Anyone?

    I'm beginning to think at least half of the 50%/stealth-communicate/rule-misunderstanding answers on this thread are trolls trying to antagonize the rational folk.

    No communication of any sort is allowed, except for an initial strategy session before the game begins!

  • Anonymous Coward (unregistered) in reply to vuk
    vuk:
    Anonymous Coward:
    vuk:
    the player should settle with one of the players that each of them says the different color and split the money after the game.So you have 100% chance to win the half of the money.If the interview is for Microsoft ,than you can say that you will fuck up you fellow player after the game and took all the money.

    That doesn't even make any sense. Does anyone actually read the problem? Anyone?

    I'm beginning to think at least half of the 50%/stealth-communicate/rule-misunderstanding answers on this thread are trolls trying to antagonize the rational folk.

    No communication of any sort is allowed, except for an initial strategy session before the game begins!

    ...

    Read. The. Problem.

  • Aboyd (unregistered) in reply to akatherder
    akatherder:
    KattMan:
    2 Guys. 2 Girls. 2 Condoms. How can each guy have sex with each girl safely?
    Guy 1 puts on condom A then B. Does Girl 1. He gives condom B to Guy 2 who then does Girl 1. Guy 1 does Girl 2 then gives condom A to Guy 2. He puts it on over his (condom B) and does Girl 2.
    No. At your second step, Guy 2 has acquired STD from Guy 1. It's a trick question -- everyone worries about protecting themselves from the women's supposed STDs, but never considers that the guys can also have STDs. No combination of the 2 condoms can protect you from both women AND the other guy.
  • s (unregistered) in reply to zip
    zip:

    FAIL

    "What does simultaneously mean"

    ahahahahah yeah that's real ambiguous

    Once they have had a chance to look at the other hats, the players must [ (simultaneously guess the color of their own hats) OR (pass) ]

    or

    Once they have had a chance to look at the other hats, the players must simultaneously [ (guess the color of their own hats) OR (pass) ]

    This is the source of all the misunderstandings.

  • Aboyd (unregistered) in reply to KattMan
    KattMan:
    You almost got it

    Put on A and B, have sex with 1. Remove B, have sex with 2. Turn B inside out, have sex with 3.

    You almost got it, too. While your answer protects from STDs, it is suboptimal, as it requires the man to unnecessarily double-up the condom usage, resulting in poor stimulation. The optimal answer is:

    Put on A, have sex with 1. Remove A, put on B, have sex with 2. Turn A inside out, place it over B, have sex with 3.

    In this fashion, the man only has to wear 2 layers of condoms for the final sex act, rather than the 1st and 3rd.

    Your penis is welcome.

  • Alexander Petrov (unregistered) in reply to YourMoFoFriend
    YourMoFoFriend:
    A typical question I used was "How many trips a tooth fairy makes per night". Here are some answers I got: - without a pause: "3000"
    But that's exact correct answer. Every tooth fairy does exact 3000 trips each night. Show me a single tooth fairy that doesn't.
  • (cs) in reply to Extra Character
    Extra Character:
    Crossing the bridge. 1 and 2 cross together (2 minutes). 1 returns (3 minutes) and crosses with 5 (8 minutes). Either 1 or 2 (9 minutes) returns and crosses with 10 (19 minutes) after 5 reaches the other side. Total time = 17 minutes.

    19 minutes is not optimal.

  • Mania (unregistered) in reply to Aboyd
    Aboyd:
    akatherder:
    KattMan:
    2 Guys. 2 Girls. 2 Condoms. How can each guy have sex with each girl safely?
    Guy 1 puts on condom A then B. Does Girl 1. He gives condom B to Guy 2 who then does Girl 1. Guy 1 does Girl 2 then gives condom A to Guy 2. He puts it on over his (condom B) and does Girl 2.
    No. At your second step, Guy 2 has acquired STD from Guy 1. It's a trick question -- everyone worries about protecting themselves from the women's supposed STDs, but never considers that the guys can also have STDs. No combination of the 2 condoms can protect you from both women AND the other guy.
    How so? By step 2 the inside of condom B had never touched any part of guy 1 except for maybe his fingers when he was putting it OVER condom A. Read it again ;)
  • (cs) in reply to Aboyd
    Aboyd:
    akatherder:
    KattMan:
    2 Guys. 2 Girls. 2 Condoms. How can each guy have sex with each girl safely?
    Guy 1 puts on condom A then B. Does Girl 1. He gives condom B to Guy 2 who then does Girl 1. Guy 1 does Girl 2 then gives condom A to Guy 2. He puts it on over his (condom B) and does Girl 2.
    No. At your second step, Guy 2 has acquired STD from Guy 1. It's a trick question -- everyone worries about protecting themselves from the women's supposed STDs, but never considers that the guys can also have STDs. No combination of the 2 condoms can protect you from both women AND the other guy.

    Bullshit. Guy 1 has 2 condoms on. He infects the inside of the condom which he put on first. The girl infects the outside of the condom he put on second. So the outside of the condom he put on first is "clean" and the inside of the condom he put on second is "clean". Guy 2 puts the condom on that Guy 1 had on second, so the inside is "clean".

    This is all in theory of course. The logistics would be... messy at best.

  • Bilbo (unregistered) in reply to KJR
    KJR:
    First, let the chicken eat the grain. Then let the fox eat the chicken.

    Now take the fox over the river. The fox contains the chicken which contains the grain. All over in one trip.

    Thats efficiency.

    By which I assume you mean:

    chicken.setGrain(grain);
fox.setChicken(chicken);
river.cross(boat, me, fox);
chicken = fox.getChicken();
grain = chicken.getGrain();

    I suppose if you were being careful and wanted to preserve the original state of grain and chicken, some serialisation/deserialisation is needed.

    Of course the other clear solution is to seek the assistance of XML and ensure that grain, chicken and fox are elements defined within different namespaces.

  • Ken (unregistered) in reply to amandahugginkiss
    amandahugginkiss:
    Right now I'm testing software from a programmer who doesn't understand his clients. He's wasting time on minor shit that the customers don't care about, and the primary function the customers want is "ah, no-one really cares about that". Programmers with a superiority complex need to be shown the door.
    Of course, the same can be said for customers with a superiority complex as well.

    I remember a client who refused to follow the installation instructions, insisting that the flags to "cpio" that we supplied were wrong. He repeatedly used the flags which he "knew" were "right". Of course, every time, it failed to read the tape. He insisted that there was something wrong with the tape, and badgered the sales department to get us to make a "tar" tape instead. (Manually, of course, since all the automated scripts made a "cpio" tape.)

    Unfortunately, it was something like a $20K sale, and sales decided "the customer is always right".

  • Ken (unregistered) in reply to AN
    AN:
    Nope... Not right.. However you look at it or however you want to think about it, the chances are 50%. No matter what colour the others are wearing, you will only have a 50% chance of winning, i.e. using your logic if the others are all wearing 'BLUE' then there is 50% chance that all of you will shout out 'RED' or 50% chance only you will shout out 'RED' and win. Without any communication you cannot get a probability of higher than 50%

    /an

    Ken:
    The person who sees two other people with the same colour hat calls out the opposite colour
    Hmm... (Using "0" and "1" rather than "red" and "blue".) 000 -- Result: everyone yells "1" -- wrong 001 -- silent/silent/1 -- correct 010 -- silent/1/silent -- correct 011 -- 0/silent/silent -- correct 100 -- 1/silent/silent -- correct 101 -- silent/0/silent -- correct 110 -- silent/silent/0 -- correct 111 -- 0/0/0 -- incorrect

    Six correct, 2 incorrect. That's 75%, which is better than my 50% solution.

    So, after dozens and dozens of answers explaining in excruciating detail why the above gives you a 75% chance of winning, you still refuse to budge from your "first instinct says it's 50%, so it must be 50% despite all evidence to the contrary"? And people say these questions are of no value. You've certainly eliminated yourself from the possible pool.

    Please explain how the above chart, which shows 6 "wins" and 2 "losses", for a 75% chance of winning, is "wrong".

  • Ken (unregistered) in reply to Robert
    Robert:
    Question by Yahoo! interviewers: How would you go about finding every single barber in Minnesota?

    Apparently incorrect answer: Google it.

    Are barbers licensed by the state? If so, contact the appropriate licensing agency.

  • Ken (unregistered) in reply to Dude
    Dude:
    OK: There are 8 possibilities for hat distributions. Here's the strategy: everyone calls 'BLUE.' The only way to lose is if they all have red hats, and the chance of that happening is 1/8, and hence you have a 87.5% chance of winning.
    And another one who won't read, or can't understand, the specs. Your "solution" results in the only way to win is if everyone has a blue hat, for a 12.5% chance of winning.

    Re-read the specs. One wrong answer from anyone, and you lose.

  • Anonymouse (unregistered) in reply to I can so relate...
    I can so relate...:
    A - Why is the sky blue? - How would you estimate the weight of Earth? - How many people are there in the world?

    I was told the point of these questions was to see how comfortable I am to admit that I don't know the answer.

    Except, those aren't incredibly tough questions.

    1. Refractive properties of the atmosphere, "I'd want to look up the constants before elaborating" (then sneak a peek at the equations too). Sky isn't always blue though (see: sunset).
    2. Mass m1 in free fall obeys F=Gm1m2/r^2, where F=m1*g. m2 is the mass of the Earth, g (grav. acc.) and r (radius of Earth) are measurable, G is a universal constant. The weight of the Earth is another matter, of course, and requires another gravitational field as a context (the Sun's?). Since the interviewer apparently doesn't know the difference between mass and weight, even such basic physics should be impressive.
    3. About 6.5 billion. Should be common knowledge.

    Also, the mass of a 747 can be estimated by towing the plane via a spring scale at constant acceleration (then perhaps at constant speed to measure any friction and compensate). I wouldn't be surprised if that's actually done at airports all the time.

    Really, if I ran a software company, I wouldn't hire anyone who couldn't provide answers at least along those lines. There's a lot more to a candidate's qualifications, of course, but it's a good way to weed out the majority of people who grossly overestimate their own intelligence and academic background.

  • (cs) in reply to Ken
    Robert:
    Question by Yahoo! interviewers: How would you go about finding every single barber in Minnesota?

    Apparently incorrect answer: Google it.

    Find the population of an average sized city and find how many barbers there are in town (yellow pages). Extrapolate based on the population of the entire state.

    There are probably better answers, but for most of the "estimation" riddles, taking a sample and expanding is a good safety net answer.

  • Belly (unregistered)

    Not sure if something like this has been suggested yet, but a rewording of the hat problem 'might' clear up some of the idiocy... oh who am I kidding.

    Three players enter a room and are told that a red or blue hat will be placed on each person's head. The color of each hat is determined by a coin toss, with the outcome of one coin toss having no effect on the others. Each person will be placed in seperate room before their hat is placed on their head. Once all hats are placed, each person views a photo of the other 2 people with their hats on.

    No communication of any sort is possible, except for an initial strategy session before the game begins. Once they have had a chance to look at the other participants' hats, the players must guess the color of their own hats or pass, they do not know the other participants' answers. The group shares a hypothetical $3 million prize if at least one player guesses correctly and receive absolutely nothing if anyone guesses incorrectly.

    What strategy would you use?

  • Ken (unregistered) in reply to umpa
    umpa:
    Ken:
    Ooh! Ooh! I know!

    Stand in a circle ...

    How many persons does it take to form a circle? Tree?

    I didn't say "form a circle", I said "stand in a circle". Draw a circle on the floor and stand in it. All you need is one person. 
    :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)
    (Did you buy that excuse?)
  • Anonymous (unregistered) in reply to ERM
    ERM:
    I got asked by microsoft how I would design an alarm clock for a blind person. I went on and one about putting all kinds of braille on it and didn't even think of the obvious - make it completely vocal!
    "Good morning, it's 8:45 am. - Haha, just kidding. Now that you're awake, it's 7:45 am."

    or, as this is Microsoft: "It seems like you want to get up. Do you need assistance?"

  • Michael Ramirez (unregistered)

    The answers are easy.

    1. Use a scale.
    2. Follow the wires.
    3. Leave the others behind.
  • Ken (unregistered) in reply to Anonymouse
    Anonymouse:
    I can so relate...:
    A - Why is the sky blue? - How would you estimate the weight of Earth? - How many people are there in the world?

    I was told the point of these questions was to see how comfortable I am to admit that I don't know the answer.

    Except, those aren't incredibly tough questions.

    1. Refractive properties of the atmosphere, "I'd want to look up the constants before elaborating" (then sneak a peek at the equations too). Sky isn't always blue though (see: sunset).
    Wrong. The sky is blue, because if it were green you wouldn't know where to stop mowing the lawn.
    2. Mass m1 in free fall obeys F=G*m1*m2/r^2, where F=m1*g. m2 is the mass of the Earth, g (grav. acc.) and r (radius of Earth) are measurable, G is a universal constant. The weight of the Earth is another matter, of course, and requires another gravitational field as a context (the Sun's?). Since the interviewer apparently doesn't know the difference between mass and weight, even such basic physics should be impressive.
    You have another gravitational field -- that of the scale used to weigh the Earth.

    Hmm... My scale says the Earth weighs about 3 pounds.

    Really, if I ran a software company, I wouldn't hire anyone who couldn't provide answers at least along those lines. There's a lot more to a candidate's qualifications, of course, but it's a good way to weed out the majority of people who grossly overestimate their own intelligence and academic background.
    Given some of the answers given here to the "hat problem" (insisting it's 50%; giving "solutions" which are actually worse -- as low as 12.5%, and I think one was zero; and downright cheating), I think it's obvious that such questions might be useful in weeding out such candidates.
  • Michael Ramirez (unregistered) in reply to Rodyland

    -Chicken/fox/grain

    Leave the fox with the grain or just throw the chicken across the river.

  • (cs) in reply to akatherder
    akatherder:
    Robert:
    Question by Yahoo! interviewers: How would you go about finding every single barber in Minnesota?

    Apparently incorrect answer: Google it.

    Find the population of an average sized city and find how many barbers there are in town (yellow pages). Extrapolate based on the population of the entire state.

    There are probably better answers, but for most of the "estimation" riddles, taking a sample and expanding is a good safety net answer.

    Barbers are regulated by state statutes (in Minnesotta, they're covered under Chapter 154). I would contact the state Board of Barber and Cosmetologist Examiners, with whom all barbers must registers, and ask them for a count. I suspect they can give a speedy answer, and that while their answer will exclude any rogue barbers operating illegally, it will still be more accurate than any estimates or Yellow Pages methodology that I might otherwise try to hack together.

  • (cs) in reply to s
    s:
    Once they have had a chance to look at the other hats, the players must [ (simultaneously guess the color of their own hats) OR (pass) ]

    or

    Once they have had a chance to look at the other hats, the players must simultaneously [ (guess the color of their own hats) OR (pass) ]

    This is the source of all the misunderstandings.

    WTF? Either interpretation has the same result.

    Let's say you read it as [ (simultaneously guess the color of their own hats) OR (pass) ].

    Everyone that is going to guess a color must do so at the same time. If you don't say anything, you are implicitly passing.

    If you read it as simultaneously [ (guess the color of their own hats) OR (pass) ]

    Once someone guesses the color of their hat, everyone else has effectively passed (either by simultaneously saying "pass" or by not saying anything).

    The only other possibility is someone who has a poor grasp of English and time-based logic, assuming that you can pass at any time before or after the other people SIMULTANEOUSLY give their answer.

  • firus (unregistered) in reply to akatherder
    It's the opposite in the USA. They make them round so sewer workers can move them easier (and so they can't fall in the hole as mentioned earlier). The covers weigh a ton so i couldn't imagine it would be a very popular theft item.

    In Serbia, manhole are usually round for waterworks or sewer conduits and rectangle for telecom or electrical conduits. As for most of Europe.

    In Serbia, manhole cover theft is big business because of large amount of lead and copper used in production of covers ...

    And, the right answer to the puzzle really is: "Because of constant diameter, so cover can't fall into manhole".

  • hmmmm... (unregistered) in reply to ERM
    ERM:
    I got asked by microsoft how I would design an alarm clock for a blind person. I went on and one about putting all kinds of braille on it and didn't even think of the obvious - make it completely vocal! I was trying to be too practical....
    There's a vending machine here, the buttons have Braille on them, the items for sale do not. (and they're behind a glass panel) So although one can determine which buttons to press to select say item 23, one cannot determine what item 23 actually is.
  • (cs) in reply to vertagano
    vertagano:
    akatherder:
    Robert:
    Question by Yahoo! interviewers: How would you go about finding every single barber in Minnesota?

    Apparently incorrect answer: Google it.

    Find the population of an average sized city and find how many barbers there are in town (yellow pages). Extrapolate based on the population of the entire state.

    There are probably better answers, but for most of the "estimation" riddles, taking a sample and expanding is a good safety net answer.

    Barbers are regulated by state statutes (in Minnesotta, they're covered under Chapter 154). I would contact the state Board of Barber and Cosmetologist Examiners, with whom all barbers must registers, and ask them for a count. I suspect they can give a speedy answer, and that while their answer will exclude any rogue barbers operating illegally, it will still be more accurate than any estimates or Yellow Pages methodology that I might otherwise try to hack together.

    Are you sure they differentiate between hairdressers, barbers, and cosmetologists when they compile your numbers? Just because someone is certified, doesn't mean they are practicing. I could have a barbers license, but be working as a mechanic. Does the interviewer care about me?

  • Ken (unregistered) in reply to firus
    firus:
    And, the *right* answer to the puzzle really is: "Because of constant diameter, so cover can't fall into manhole".
    Well, as noted elsewhere, there are an infinite number of constant-diameter shapes. However, the circle is unique among those in the fact that all the others need to be properly aligned in order to fit into the hole.

    See also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reuleaux_triangle and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curve_of_constant_width

  • YourMoFoFriend (unregistered) in reply to gwenhwyfaer
    gwenhwyfaer:
    You know what? Let's just leave it there. I think you're an arse, you think I'm an arse. I wouldn't want to work for you, you wouldn't want to hire me. Your selection procedures are clearly working for you, so hey - run with them! You'll be saving anyone like me an awful lot of hassle if we can take flight at interview, rather than having to suffer working with you.
    Your insistence on knowing what others think or what their motives are is as astounding as it is baseless. I do not think you're an arse, and I don't know what made you think I am. Oh well, I guess arrogance is working out for you, "so hey - run with it" :) And if on your next interview someone asks you the "hats" puzzle... chances are it is me and I want to see you walk out of it :)
  • (cs) in reply to akatherder
    Are you sure they differentiate between hairdressers, barbers, and cosmetologists when they compile your numbers? Just because someone is certified, doesn't mean they are practicing. I could have a barbers license, but be working as a mechanic. Does the interviewer care about me?

    I am using the state's definition of barber in finding my response, and as I cite my source, I believe that is obvious.

    However, I would like to point out that the meanings of these different words is blurry:

    Often barbers who wish to only cut hair will work in barber shops. Some Master Barbers prefer to see them selves as hairdressers and work in a salon. There is a common misbelief that barbers do not perform any service other than hair cutting and that cosmetologists perform all coloring and perms but this is untrue. Many working stylists are legally Master Barbers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barber

    It remains my belief that error due to nonpracticing or illegally practicing barbers will be smaller than error from any other attempt to estimate the number of barbers based on population. Note that many factors can contribute to the distribution of barbers: affluence, proximity to a barber school, proximity to a metropolis across the state border, reputation of various barbers, number of Wal-Marts present, hair style preferences in the community, age of community (many very young or very old do not get their hair cut professionally), etc.

    I'm open to the possibility that there's a better way, but I haven't seen it yet.

  • anony coward (unregistered) in reply to akatherder
    akatherder:
    s:
    Once they have had a chance to look at the other hats, the players must [ (simultaneously guess the color of their own hats) OR (pass) ]

    or

    Once they have had a chance to look at the other hats, the players must simultaneously [ (guess the color of their own hats) OR (pass) ]

    This is the source of all the misunderstandings.

    WTF? Either interpretation has the same result.

    Let's say you read it as [ (simultaneously guess the color of their own hats) OR (pass) ].

    Everyone that is going to guess a color must do so at the same time. If you don't say anything, you are implicitly passing.

    If you read it as simultaneously [ (guess the color of their own hats) OR (pass) ]

    Once someone guesses the color of their hat, everyone else has effectively passed (either by simultaneously saying "pass" or by not saying anything).

    The only other possibility is someone who has a poor grasp of English and time-based logic, assuming that you can pass at any time before or after the other people SIMULTANEOUSLY give their answer.

    substitute poor grasp of english with different understanding of a non-formally stated case, and you've got it. case 1:

    (all players) [ (all guess at once) || (pass [all remain silent] ) ]

    in this case no one may remain silent. (cause that is the way this case is understood by the applicant.)

    case 2: (apparently the correct understanding)

    any player [ (guess) || (remain silent) ]

  • YourMoFoFriend (unregistered) in reply to Aboyd
    Aboyd:
    An interviewer asking such gimmicky questions reveals he/she is an amateur, and thus working with/for such an individual is not a good opportunity at all. Therefore there is no opportunity to blow, but there is time to save by cutting it short. Thus, the only correct answer to this riddle is that it's a trick question, and the only candidate worth hiring is the one who attempts to leave in disgust.
    So, the interviewer asking you something you don't like makes him an amateur? And you assuming that he is asking you those questions just for his sadistic pleasure are not an arrogant amateur? What will you tell a client that gives you a spec that you don't like but that's what they want done EXACTLY the way they specified? Call them amateurs and walk out? This whole thread is way more frustrating then I expected. Half the people here can't read, the other half cant follow the rules, third half can't accept a correct solution over their incorrect one and the last half will refuse to accept that perhaps there are good, real reasons behind peoples actions even if those reasons are not obvious to you on the first glance.
  • anony coward (unregistered) in reply to I can so relate...

    -Sky is blue during most of the daylight hours because of its refractive index. Easy. (Not sure why this would be an interview question, unless just to establish a baseline of communication and comprehension ability).

    -What tools do i have? Do I have a list of all major objects in the solar system with their rotational velocity and distance from the sun? Do I have the weight and mass of an arbitrary object in the gravitational field of the earth and also the mass of the earth? You just want me to guess? I know the circumference of the earth and the order of composition of elements in the crust and mantle, if I can get the density of those then I can guess. (This question used to determine what questions an interviewee will ask before trying to get an answer, and also how an interviewee will respond to an impossible task)

    -How many people are there in the world? Right now? Do you also want the rate of population increase? And the acceleration of population increase? The jerk of population increase? (jerk is technical term) And I assume you mean living on the surface of the earth, not buried in the world... (Tests applicant to see what they will do with a trivial problem)

  • n00bie (unregistered) in reply to Patrick McCormick
    Patrick McCormick:
    TimS:
    Really, it's the approach that you're trying to see, not the answer. If someone shouts out the answer immediately, and recites the answer, as memorized, from a book of problems, that's an immediate check in the "no" column for me. On the other hand, if they have a good idea as to how the problem needs to be solved, that's a check in the "yes" column.

    So someone who has a very good idea about how to go about solving the problem and happens to already know the answer anyway is going to get 'an immediate check in the "no" column".

    Smart...

    No, he was looking for someone that can "act" best.

  • Anonymous Cow-herd (unregistered) in reply to YourMoFoFriend
    YourMoFoFriend:
    No way. These are the same arseholes that think everything in a company revolves around them. WRONG. Business revolves around business, sales, marketing and sometimes... well customers and their needs.
    Well, I'm terribly sorry for not considering the company's business needs when I weighed that job offer. I just thought turnabout was fair play.
  • SoullessMegaCorp (unregistered) in reply to UncleMidriff
    UncleMidriff:
    I made a mistake by not making sure I fully understood a solution before I said that I thought it was incorrect.
    I'm sorry, but in light of this, we do not feel you would be a proper match in our programming department. Perhaps you might be interested in a position in management?
  • Ken (unregistered) in reply to n00bie
    n00bie:
    Patrick McCormick:
    TimS:
    Really, it's the approach that you're trying to see, not the answer. If someone shouts out the answer immediately, and recites the answer, as memorized, from a book of problems, that's an immediate check in the "no" column for me. On the other hand, if they have a good idea as to how the problem needs to be solved, that's a check in the "yes" column.

    So someone who has a very good idea about how to go about solving the problem and happens to already know the answer anyway is going to get 'an immediate check in the "no" column".

    Smart...

    No, he was looking for someone that can "act" best.

    If asked the "three hat problem", my answer would be:

    I already heard this one. At first, I came up with "have one person say 'red', and you have a 50% chance of winning". But someone else pointed out that "if you see two of the same color, say the opposite, otherwise remain silent" gives a 75% chance. That didn't make sense from an intuitive standpoint, so I made a chart and I saw that 6 out of the 8 possibilities did result in a win. So my answer is "if you see two of the same color, say the opposite, otherwise remain silent".

    How'd I do?

  • waffles (unregistered) in reply to Extra Character
    Extra Character:
    Crossing the bridge. 1 and 2 cross together. 1 returns and crosses with 5. Either 1 or 2 returns and crosses with 10 after 5 reaches the other side. Total time = 17 minutes.

    I would not get the job, because obviously MS was not looking for a Google search.

    I certainly wouldn't hire someone who googled it and still managed to get it wrong.

  • Ken (unregistered) in reply to SoullessMegaCorp
    SoullessMegaCorp:
    UncleMidriff:
    I made a mistake by not making sure I fully understood a solution before I said that I thought it was incorrect.
    I'm sorry, but in light of this, we do not feel you would be a proper match in our programming department. Perhaps you might be interested in a position in management?
    He's not management material. He admitted making a mistake.
  • Hamstray (unregistered) in reply to anony coward
    anony coward:
    ... Casinos make money because the odds are always (over the long term) in their favor, not because people do not understand odds.

    But if people were to understand odds they probably wouldn't bet away their money in a casino, leaving no money for the casino.

  • hmmmm... (unregistered) in reply to Ken
    Ken:
    SoullessMegaCorp:
    UncleMidriff:
    I made a mistake by not making sure I fully understood a solution before I said that I thought it was incorrect.
    I'm sorry, but in light of this, we do not feel you would be a proper match in our programming department. Perhaps you might be interested in a position in management?
    He's not management material. He admitted making a mistake.
    He could still make if he can blame his mistake on a weakling...
  • hmmmm... (unregistered) in reply to Ken
    Ken:
    SoullessMegaCorp:
    UncleMidriff:
    I made a mistake by not making sure I fully understood a solution before I said that I thought it was incorrect.
    I'm sorry, but in light of this, we do not feel you would be a proper match in our programming department. Perhaps you might be interested in a position in management?
    He's not management material. He admitted making a mistake.
    He could still make it if he can blame his mistake on a weakling...
  • YourMoFoFriend (unregistered) in reply to Anonymous Cow-herd
    Anonymous Cow-herd:
    YourMoFoFriend:
    No way. These are the same arseholes that think everything in a company revolves around them. WRONG. Business revolves around business, sales, marketing and sometimes... well customers and their needs.
    Well, I'm terribly sorry for not considering the company's business needs when I weighed that job offer. I just thought turnabout was fair play.
    Perhaps you should have. Especially when considering a job offer. :)) BTW, do you think there will be an offer if the company sees you as an inconsiderate type of a guy?
  • anony coward (unregistered) in reply to Hamstray
    Hamstray:
    anony coward:
    ... Casinos make money because the odds are always (over the long term) in their favor, not because people do not understand odds.

    But if people were to understand odds they probably wouldn't bet away their money in a casino, leaving no money for the casino.

    Knowledge and understanding are rarely tied to motivation and actions. Desire and greed are more powerful. Knowledge and understanding may influence HOW someone does irrational things, such as finding casinos with better stated odds.

    And yes there is such a thing as a professional gambler, someone who understands odds, people, and the game enough to make money; but these people make money at the expense of other gamblers, not the casino (again, over the long term).

    captcha: paint (as in 'in the paint')

  • (cs) in reply to SoullessMegaCorp
    SoullessMegaCorp:
    UncleMidriff:
    I made a mistake by not making sure I fully understood a solution before I said that I thought it was incorrect.
    I'm sorry, but in light of this, we do not feel you would be a proper match in our programming department. Perhaps you might be interested in a position in management?

    Dude! You guys got perfect programmers in your programming department? That rocks! You're right, I'm not worthy of working with you. I would love to buy whatever software you produce though, because, with perfect programmers, it is surely awesome! Oh man, I can't wait! What's your website?! I wanna check you guys out so hard! The meetings you guys have must be quite a sight, what with every single idea being perfectly communicated and perfectly understood 100% of the time, with out any questions or misunderstandings, ever.

    ;-)

  • SchmoieJoe (unregistered) in reply to Aboyd
    Aboyd:
    KattMan:
    You almost got it

    Put on A and B, have sex with 1. Remove B, have sex with 2. Turn B inside out, have sex with 3.

    You almost got it, too. While your answer protects from STDs, it is suboptimal, as it requires the man to unnecessarily double-up the condom usage, resulting in poor stimulation. The optimal answer is:

    Put on A, have sex with 1. Remove A, put on B, have sex with 2. Turn A inside out, place it over B, have sex with 3.

    In this fashion, the man only has to wear 2 layers of condoms for the final sex act, rather than the 1st and 3rd.

    Your penis is welcome.

    Your modification introduces fluid transfer from the guy to girl #3. If the goal is safe sex - or even just preventing pregnancy - that's a no-no.

  • Anonymouse (unregistered) in reply to Ken
    Casinos make money because the odds are always (over the long term) in their favor, not because people do not understand odds.

    There are four things really.

    1. The odds guarantee that casinos make money over the long term.
    2. Forcing players to make many small bets rather than "risking it all" evens out the curve so it has an almost constant upwards slope. If casinos allowed unlimited bets they could potentially run out of money in the short term.
    3. Irrational people will play suboptimally (splitting tens when they "feel lucky" etc.), which improves the odds for the casino. But ok, setting foot in a casino despite 1. and 2. demonstrates you're not completely sane.
    4. You can't "quit while you're ahead", unless that means never setting foot in a casino again (unlikely if you've just "proven" that you can win). Coming back a month later is equivalent to continuing the same game.

    Did I mention I love casinos? :)

  • Look at me! I'm on the internets (unregistered) in reply to Anonymous
    Anonymous:
    count = 0; for(i = 0; i < 32; i++) { count += (integer >> 1) & 1; }

    Constant time, and therefore O(n). Remember, since the size of the integer is constant, so is the running time.

    Freaking brilliant! I can now do a Dykstra's algorithm in constant time because the number of nodes in the graph is fixed when I start the problem.

    Used to take O(n^3).

    I would suggest you get a refund from your university.

    Captcha - burned

  • (cs)

    If I was presented with one of these fucking riddles on a job interview I would get up and walk out.

    If an interviewer is too stupid to come up with a real-world what-if and has to resort to riddles, I do not want to work for them.

    It's not a fucking game. When I've had to interview people I can do it just fine without asking "What have I got in my pockets?"

    Job interviews are not mazes with cheese in them. Either interview people like a professional or become a puppeteer if you like watching people dance on a string.

Leave a comment on “Job Interview 2.0: Now With Riddles!”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

Log Out

« Return to Article