The Daily WTF: Curious Perversions in Information Technology

2007-05-18 Reply Admin

Oh, that's so obvious! Why didn't I think of that? Thanks.

2007-05-19 Reply Admin

OutsideInwards:
Take for example another riddle I had once been asked in an interview (to determine how well I can "think outside the box"): You are in a completely stable, cube shaped room made out of an indestructable material. There are no doors and no windows. The only items in the room with you is a table and a mirror. How do you get out?

Smash the mirror on the table, use a shard to cut your wrists.

It is far more likely to work than the "pun" answer...

2007-05-19 Reply Admin

YourMoFoFriend:
real_aardvark:
And so to technical ability: OK, let's assume this as a starting point. You obviously can't ask me whether I'm part Jewish. (This would be a question I would love to ask. It would add 10% to the chance of me hiring somebody at this point.)
I don’t need to ask you that, as I am one and chances are I’ll just “see” whether you are also or not :))

I was talking to a lawyer many years ago (long story, irrelevent to the task at hand), and after hearing my last name, asked me "are you MOT?" It took me a second or two to parse the question, at which point I was able to answer (truthfully) "yes". Given my last name, I was surprised by the question, as most people assume I'm Irish. (Now, if you're MOT, there may be enough hints there for you to guess my last name. However, there is no need to post any guesses here.)

real_aardvark · 2007-05-19 Reply Admin

This has all been highly educational.

The next time I go for an interview, I think I'll take a sports bag in, containing -- oh, I don't know, maybe a smurf, or a teddy-bear, or a furby; but, and here's the important thing, it'll have a percussion cap attached to the zipper.

When some idiot asks me to explain a logic puzzle, I'm going to say, politely, "I'm sorry, I used to be enthralled by these things back in eighth grade, but I seem to have grown out of them over the years. However, and this may interest you: I've got Schroedinger's cat here, in this bag. Do you want to open it and take a peek?"

This would be so much more fun than just walking out.

YourMoFoFriend:
real_aardvark:
And so to technical ability: OK, let's assume this as a starting point. You obviously can't ask me whether I'm part Jewish. (This would be a question I would love to ask. It would add 10% to the chance of me hiring somebody at this point.)
I don’t need to ask you that, as I am one and chances are I’ll just “see” whether you are also or not :))

What, all interviews between Jewish guys are conducted stark bollock naked? Certainly sounds more fun than stupid logic puzzles. How do you know I'm not Moslem? (I'm neither, btw. I blame my parents.)

YourMoFoFriend:
real_aardvark:
And why logical puzzles? Why not "I see you have French on your resume. I've always wondered. How do you ask for an upside-down rhubarb tart in French?"
Nothing wrong with talking. That is usually covered in the first 50 minutes we’re in the room... May I please ask one puzzle? Just one, I promise. I won’t even require you to solve it, just want to see if your fuse is so short that this one puzzle will send you flying, cose apparently it will send Gwenhyfaer over the edge and I definitely do not want her in my team.

Of course you can. The answer is: no, you may not; but thank you for being so accommodating. Nobody else has even given me the chance to decline.

And, btw, your team would almost certainly be improved by having Gwenhyfaer as a member. The fact that (s)he would be excluded, solely on the basis of a cretinous devotion to logic puzzles (after apparently wasting fifty minutes on conversational banalities) is sad for your team, but probably best for all in the long run.

YourMoFoFriend:
I never even said that puzzles are the only or even one of the better ones of the interviewing techniques out there. All I’m saying that there is some merit to them and perhaps walking out when asked a puzzle is… how shell I put it… well a bit childish to say the least.

What, this is the top-end of the continuum? What's the bottom end? We seem to have established that you would never employ somebody with this attitude. I don't know about you, but I value each and every fifty minutes of my life, particularly if they might otherwise be wasted by pointless conversation with a total stranger.

I think walking out, under those circumstances, is a win-win situation.

Well, I'm 10% Welsh, you're somewhere between 1% and 100% Jewish, and Gwenhyfaer is God only knows what. Let's rephrase Grandpa's problem in a way that makes sense for an interview.

One of us has got a red hat. One of us has got a blue hat. One of us can't wear a hat, because our head is too swollen, for reasons that are extraneous to the puzzle.

It is very, very likely that none of us would be seen dead in the same room as either of the others.

Unfortunately, one of us (and only one) must be hired to complete a job which is worth $3 million. If the job is completed, each of us gets $1 million. If not, we get bupkis. (Or, if you prefer, Llareggub.)

As the interviewer, what would your strategy be?

No conferring. All decisions must be simultaneous. Pirates not allowed...

... and you still have the choice of telling me what the French for "rhubarb upside-down cake" is, if you'd rather.

2007-05-20 Reply Admin

Why is the sky blue: This is Los Angles, it sure aint blue here.

Weight of earth: Meaningless question. The mass of the earth would make sense, but the weight is meaningless. You would, for a start, define what the elevation you are weighing it at, for a start.

How many people are there in the world: Depends on if you believe in the hollow earth theory, otherwise I believe there are a few thousands in the mines at any one time, Do you want to include people in basements as being "in" the world?

2007-05-20 Reply Admin

real_aardvark:
The next time I go for an interview, I think I'll take a sports bag in, containing -- oh, I don't know, maybe a smurf, or a teddy-bear, or a furby; but, and here's the important thing, it'll have a percussion cap attached to the zipper. When some idiot asks me to explain a logic puzzle, I'm going to say, politely, "I'm sorry, I used to be enthralled by these things back in eighth grade, but I seem to have grown out of them over the years. However, and this may interest you: I've got Schroedinger's cat here, in this bag. Do you want to open it and take a peek?" This would be so much more fun than just walking out.

Yes it would. You know what else it would be? You NOT walking out of an interview. Maybe you ARE that good, maybe if you showed me that you are that good I won't ask you a puzzle, though the fact that you deem me an idiot just because I gave you a puzzle is slightly worriesome. BTW "Schroedinger's cat"... very clever :)

real_aardvark:
Of course you can. The answer is: no, you may not; but thank you for being so accommodating. Nobody else has even given me the chance to decline.

Well, I have always given that chance. Not many people declined.

real_aardvark:
And, btw, your team would almost certainly be improved by having Gwenhyfaer as a member. The fact that (s)he would be excluded, solely on the basis of a cretinous devotion to logic puzzles (after apparently wasting fifty minutes on conversational banalities) is sad for your team, but probably best for all in the long run.

Let's address this assertion of yours step by step: 1. She would be beneficial for my team. Why? What makes you think she is any good? So far I've seen a lot of attitude and willingness to pass judjement based on... hmm... nothing really. Is that a rule of some sort, that "he who has attitude must possess wisdom as well"? In a span of one thread she said that I'm an arse, assumed what I think of her, insulted another guy who disagreed with her and gave a short but passionate speech a-la "I've read Marx, capitlism sucks"... Perhaps if I was leading CTU and was looking for Jack Bauer replacement I might see those qualities as plusses... maybe (This is a reference to TV show "24").

She would be excluded, solely on the basis of a cretinous devotion to logic puzzles Please, no one excluded her - she walked out, solely on the basis of her cretinous devotion to hate of logic puzzles and apparently everyone who dares to insult her by asking one.
after apparently wasting fifty minutes on conversational banalities 10-15 for introduction, me telling you about the company, you telling me about your projects, etc., 20-30 for the tech portion (it's a tech interview after all), another 10-15 for chit-chat and perhaps a puzzle. No good? Shell I revise my plan because, god forbid, some applicants may find a puzzle offensive?

real_aardvark:
What, this is the top-end of the continuum? What's the bottom end? We seem to have established that you would never employ somebody with this attitude. I don't know about you, but I value each and every fifty minutes of my life, particularly if they might otherwise be wasted by pointless conversation with a total stranger. I think walking out, under those circumstances, is a win-win situation.

I agree. I'm sure there are circumstances when I would walk as well, it's just, well, there aren't that many of those, and getting a puzzle on an average interview is definitely not one of them. At least for me. Neither it is for you, apparently :)

real_aardvark:
Well, I'm 10% Welsh, you're somewhere between 1% and 100% Jewish, and Gwenhyfaer is God only knows what. Let's rephrase Grandpa's problem in a way that makes sense for an interview. One of us has got a red hat. One of us has got a blue hat. One of us can't wear a hat, because our head is too swollen, for reasons that are extraneous to the puzzle.

Assuming that you do not reserve the "swollen head" for yourself it's either me or Gwenhyfaer. I don't think my head is all that swollen, but than I also think that puzzles could be usefull and that making sweeping generalizations about a company based on a puzzle on an interview is a bit unreasonable...

real_aardvark:
It is very, very likely that none of us would be seen dead in the same room as either of the others.

Maybe, maybe not. I bet if we were in a room we'd spend a few lovely hours talking about all kinds of crap and maybe even solved a couple of puzzles completely unaware of this little online disagreement of ours. Now, working together is a whole different story :))

real_aardvark:
Unfortunately, one of us (and only one) must be hired to complete a job which is worth $3 million. If the job is completed, each of us gets $1 million. If not, we get bupkis. (Or, if you prefer, Llareggub.) As the interviewer, what would your strategy be? No conferring. All decisions must be simultaneous. Pirates not allowed...

So, am I interviewing you, me and Gwenhyfaer? Or is it we're in a room and yell either "I'll take the project" or "Pass"? Anyway, the project should go to the most qualified, not the most "fuck you all" attitude guy. Do you want the project? Do you want Gwenhyfaer in your team? What if each of you offer a solution design and you need to choose one, are you sure you can count on Gwenhyfaer taking your critique without going apeshit on you? How about her defending her disign without going "it's better because it's better, if you don't see it then you're stupid"? (true story BTW)

real_aardvark:
... and you still have the choice of telling me what the French for "rhubarb upside-down cake" is, if you'd rather.

I wish I spoke French, would've made it easier last time I went there. Them French know their pastries though :)) Speaking of "cakes", what you did is yet another interviewing technique (find something personal and positive to talk about, use picture or some such as a hook, try to make a connection on personal level...). This is no better or worse then any other technique out there. Have you ever been thru a "behavioral interview"? Would you walk out if asked to describe your actions in one of those imaginary scenarios behavioral interviews are so full of? How is that different from a puzzle? What would Gwenhyfaer do? :)

real_aardvark · 2007-05-20 Reply Admin

YourMoFoFriend:
Maybe you ARE that good, maybe if you showed me that you are that good I won't ask you a puzzle, though the fact that you deem me an idiot just because I gave you a puzzle is slightly worriesome. BTW "Schroedinger's cat"... very clever :)

Who said I deem you an idiot? I'm assuming a context here, because, y'know, you kind of have to when you're dealing with a hypothetical case derived from a thread on a blog.

For what it's worth, I do not deem you an idiot. Deeply misguided and possibly self-destructive, maybe. But an idiot? Not at all, given the evidence so far on this thread.

However, given the hypothetical situation whereby we've spent 50 minutes in an interview, and you still don't know enough to differentiate "hire" from "no hire," and you ask me a nincompoop eighth-grade logic puzzle, then my assumption (based upon my own experience with this sort of interview, and reinforced by the experiences of several others on this thread -- not the G person in particular) is that you would, at that point, have proved yourself an incompetent judge of relative worth for the position, assuming that the position in question is not the Lucasian Professor of Mathematics at Cambridge. And possibly so, even then. I merely use "idiot" as a contextual and conversational short-form for the above.

YourMoFoFriend:
real_aardvark:
Of course you can. The answer is: no, you may not; but thank you for being so accommodating. Nobody else has even given me the chance to decline.
Well, I have always given that chance. Not many people declined.

Then you have some statistical evidence (limited, obviously) for what I see as an indefensible supposition that this technique has any value in an interview. It'd be a bit biased. How many successful riddlers turned out to be valuable employees, and how many not? And how does that compare to the norm? Of course, you'll never know about the 100% gold/dross that you threw away by asking the question in the first place...

YourMoFoFriend:
real_aardvark:
And, btw, your team would almost certainly be improved by having Gwenhyfaer as a member.
Let's address this assertion of yours step by step: 1. She would be beneficial for my team. Why? What makes you think she is any good? So far I've seen a lot of attitude and willingness to pass judjement based on... hmm... nothing really. Is that a rule of some sort, that "he who has attitude must possess wisdom as well"? In a span of one thread she said that I'm an arse, assumed what I think of her, insulted another guy who disagreed with her and gave a short but passionate speech a-la "I've read Marx, capitlism sucks"... Perhaps if I was leading CTU and was looking for Jack Bauer replacement I might see those qualities as plusses... maybe (This is a reference to TV show "24").

She would be excluded, solely on the basis of a cretinous devotion to logic puzzles Please, no one excluded her - she walked out, solely on the basis of her cretinous devotion to hate of logic puzzles and apparently everyone who dares to insult her by asking one.

after apparently wasting fifty minutes on conversational banalities 10-15 for introduction, me telling you about the company, you telling me about your projects, etc., 20-30 for the tech portion (it's a tech interview after all), another 10-15 for chit-chat and perhaps a puzzle. No good? Shell I revise my plan because, god forbid, some applicants may find a puzzle offensive?

It's not an assertion: thus the use of the qualifier "almost." It's merely a supposition. Rather a difficult one to test under the circumstances, though.

I've read his/her other comments on completely different threads. Acerbic, maybe. Opinionated, definitely. Unable tolerate fools gladly ... well, a lot of us in this business are like that. I guess your only other alternative is to hire the fools.

Blogs is different from life. (For that matter, interviews are different from life. Thank God.) It is permissible to espouse an extreme perspective in a blog that one would not, normally, act upon in real life. I doubt that Gwenhyfaer would walk out in a real interview. I suspect that (s)he would far rather solve the problem, get you to gush over employing her/him, and then take great pleasure in telling you to go fuck yourself. Or maybe that would just be my reaction.

Yes. Why not revise your plan and ask the dumb questions first, thus giving both of us a chance to recognize that this is hardly a marriage made in heaven? Then we both save the 50 minutes of crap with a stranger. Gee, that's a whole hour and forty minutes. Win-win, as I say.

YourMoFoFriend:
real_aardvark:
Well, I'm 10% Welsh, you're somewhere between 1% and 100% Jewish, and Gwenhyfaer is God only knows what. Let's rephrase Grandpa's problem in a way that makes sense for an interview. One of us has got a red hat. One of us has got a blue hat. One of us can't wear a hat, because our head is too swollen, for reasons that are extraneous to the puzzle.
Assuming that you do not reserve the "swollen head" for yourself it's either me or Gwenhyfaer.

Oops, just lost on your own terms. The whole (pointless) point of these logic puzzles is to check whether people make unwarranted assumptions. Now, somebody has to wear the blue hat (who, doesn't matter) and somebody has to wear the red hat (who, doesn't matter), and I have no idea about the physical characteristics of either of you, let alone your choice of millinery. On the other hand, I can look in the mirror.

Yup, the swollen head would be me. Must stop taking those Amazonian drugs. (That's a reference to "Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail, 72", which is presumably three times better than a reference to "24.")

Politically, at least within the lower 48, I'd guess you as the red hat. And what's this about "a short but passionate speech a-la "I've read Marx, capitlism sucks?" A slightly swivel-eyed extrapolation, surely? I'm not sure I'd trust you to judge the result of a logic puzzle beauty contest anyway, given this sort of attitude. And that's the general reason I don't trust anybody else, in an interview, to be doing anything else except confirming their own preconceptions and wasting my time by asking the bloody things.

YourMoFoFriend:
Anyway, the project should go to the most qualified, not the most "fuck you all" attitude guy. Do you want the project? Do you want Gwenhyfaer in your team? What if each of you offer a solution design and you need to choose one, are you sure you can count on Gwenhyfaer taking your critique without going apeshit on you? How about her defending her disign without going "it's better because it's better, if you don't see it then you're stupid"? (true story BTW)

Do I want the project? (Do I know what a rhetorical question means?) Depends. Also irrelevant to the question.

Do I want Gwenhyfaer on my team? Read the rubric, mate.

Would I put up with an idiot who says "it's better because it's better... etc?" Well, I had to put up with endless meetings chaired by a (very pleasant) Cobol guy who refused to make a single decision because "Everything is connected to everything else." (Also a true story.) My personaly preference? Fire both of the fuckers. Employment legislation, and tort law, are getting way too lame.

YourMoFoFriend:
Have you ever been thru a "behavioral interview"? Would you walk out if asked to describe your actions in one of those imaginary scenarios behavioral interviews are so full of? How is that different from a puzzle? What would Gwenhyfaer do? :)

This really is quite fun. No, I have never been asked to exhibit at Crufts, though I have sniffed the odd dog's bum every now and again. Would I walk out of the sort of interview you describe? Damn right I would. I thought juvenilia like logic puzzles was bad, but you've just demonstrated that there's a layer below that that (I assume) even you wouldn't stoop to. How is a behavioural interview different from a puzzle? The question is the answer, surely.

What would Gwenhyfaer do? I don't know. What would Brian Boitano do?

2007-05-20 Reply Admin

Last post.

2007-05-20 Reply Admin

real_aardvark:
Who said I deem you an idiot? I'm assuming a context here, because, y'know, you kind of have to when you're dealing with a hypothetical case derived from a thread on a blog. For what it's worth, I do not deem you an idiot. Deeply misguided and possibly self-destructive, maybe. But an idiot? Not at all, given the evidence so far on this thread.

Right. No worries, just because you didn't call me an idiot now doesn't mean you can't do it later... and there we are, just a few lines down you do call me an idiot. Flattering. Misguided? Self-destructive? All because I think puzzles could be usefull?

real_aardvark:
However, given the hypothetical situation whereby we've spent 50 minutes in an interview, and you still don't know enough to differentiate "hire" from "no hire," and you ask me a nincompoop eighth-grade logic puzzle, then my assumption (based upon my own experience with this sort of interview, and reinforced by the experiences of several others on this thread -- not the G person in particular) is that you would, at that point, have proved yourself an incompetent judge of relative worth for the position, assuming that the position in question is not the Lucasian Professor of Mathematics at Cambridge. And possibly so, even then. I merely use "idiot" as a contextual and conversational short-form for the above.

As I said, just a few lines down :)) Personally I used to ask a "tooth fairy" type of a question rather than a puzzle, but that wouldn't make a difference to you, would it? Let me see if I get it right: 1. Puzzles and such are unacceptable on interviews 2. When asked they indicate two things: the company is no good and the interviewer is an idiot. 3. At this point the right action is to walk, or stay just to dance when the offer comes and you decline

Does that sum it up OK?

real_aardvark:
Then you have some statistical evidence (limited, obviously) for what I see as an indefensible supposition that this technique has any value in an interview. It'd be a bit biased. How many successful riddlers turned out to be valuable employees, and how many not? And how does that compare to the norm? Of course, you'll never know about the 100% gold/dross that you threw away by asking the question in the first place...

I doubt I threw anyone away, regardless, if someones ego is so inflated that they are insulted by a puzzle (or if they are so flaky that a puzzle will set them off) I don't think it's a huge loss at all. So far I've been lucky to work with excellent people, some I interviewed and some interviewed me, but I've never heard that an attitude "one puzzle and I'm outa here" is a very desirable quality in a guy/girl

real_aardvark:
1. I've read his/her other comments on completely different threads. Acerbic, maybe. Opinionated, definitely. Unable tolerate fools gladly ... well, a lot of us in this business are like that. I guess your only other alternative is to hire the fools.

So now there are fools and those that walk out? No one in the middle? I guess I'll go with fools than. There is a better chance they won't loose their marbles the moment something doesn't go their way.

real_aardvark:
2. Blogs is different from life. (For that matter, interviews are different from life. Thank God.) It is permissible to espouse an extreme perspective in a blog that one would not, normally, act upon in real life. I doubt that Gwenhyfaer would walk out in a real interview. I suspect that (s)he would far rather solve the problem, get you to gush over employing her/him, and then take great pleasure in telling you to go fuck yourself. Or maybe that would just be my reaction.

People that say "walk out" is the only right thing to do yet not willing to walk in real life should probably shut the fuck up. Same goes for people saying they'd turn the job down solely because they've been given a puzzle during the interview... And please note, I'm not saying that you should always go with the first job offer you get, no, I'm talking specifically about turning an offer down because of a puzzle.

real_aardvark:
3. Yes. Why not revise your plan and ask the dumb questions first, thus giving both of us a chance to recognize that this is hardly a marriage made in heaven? Then we both save the 50 minutes of crap with a stranger. Gee, that's a whole hour and forty minutes. Win-win, as I say.

Perhaps next time I will.

real_aardvark:
Oops, just lost on your own terms. The whole (pointless) point of these logic puzzles is to check whether people make unwarranted assumptions. Now, somebody has to wear the blue hat (who, doesn't matter) and somebody has to wear the red hat (who, doesn't matter), and I have no idea about the physical characteristics of either of you, let alone your choice of millinery. On the other hand, I can look in the mirror. Yup, the swollen head would be me. Must stop taking those Amazonian drugs. (That's a reference to "Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail, 72", which is presumably three times better than a reference to "24.")

The pointless point of those puzzles is to see your reaction to them, then perhaps see you give it a try. Definitely not to torture or humiliate you :)

real_aardvark:
Politically, at least within the lower 48, I'd guess you as the red hat.

I'm in the bluest state of them all, I also do not belong to either party, but leaning towards democrats, who doesn't these days :)

real_aardvark:
And what's this about "a short but passionate speech a-la "I've read Marx, capitlism sucks?" A slightly swivel-eyed extrapolation, surely?

This speech

real_aardvark:
I'm not sure I'd trust you to judge the result of a logic puzzle beauty contest anyway, given this sort of attitude. And that's the general reason I don't trust anybody else, in an interview, to be doing anything else except confirming their own preconceptions and wasting my time by asking the bloody things.

So, what about my attitude again? Anyway, I hope your non-trusting thing works out for you, I think it does already, so everyone's happy :)

YourMoFoFriend:
Do I want the project? (Do I know what a rhetorical question means?) Depends. Also irrelevant to the question. Do I want Gwenhyfaer on my team? Read the rubric, mate.

Well, you called me an idiot already, might as well ask, so you want Gwenhyfaer on your team? Cose if you don't then what the heck are we talking about? You wouldn't walk out, you wouldn't hire someone walking out... you'd do exactly what I would yet somehow you claim some moral, or intellectual upper hand here? How come? (Please don't give me "Unlike you, I wouldn't ask a puzzle", there's ALWAYS a question that somebody will think is s-o-o-o-o stupid it warrants a walk out, in case of G it happens to be a puzzle, in your case it well may be one of them behavioral ones)

real_aardvark:
Would I put up with an idiot who says "it's better because it's better... etc?" Well, I had to put up with endless meetings chaired by a (very pleasant) Cobol guy who refused to make a single decision because "Everything is connected to everything else." (Also a true story.) My personaly preference? Fire both of the fuckers. Employment legislation, and tort law, are getting way too lame.

Agree, and I guess that confirms my original assumption that you like unstable fucks in your team as much as I (or anyone else for that matter) do.

real_aardvark:
This really is quite fun. No, I have never been asked to exhibit at Crufts, though I have sniffed the odd dog's bum every now and again. Would I walk out of the sort of interview you describe? Damn right I would. I thought juvenilia like logic puzzles was bad, but you've just demonstrated that there's a layer below that that (I assume) even you wouldn't stoop to. How is a behavioral interview different from a puzzle? The question is the answer, surely.

I would bet my weekly pay that you wouldn't walk out of one of those either, you might get pissed, but you sound way more reasonable than a typical "walk outie". And just to make you feel a bit more secure, I personally went on one of them "behavioral" interviews, it sucked ass, but... I was explained prior that this is company’s policy and that apparently there is a study somewhere that shows these interviews are better than other types. So there you go. BTW, the company was good, the pay was excellent, work was interesting and as far as I can tell the team was fine as well. Too bad I didn't get the job, but I wouldn't turn it down if offered... definitely wouldn't turn it down just because of all the stupid questions their HR decided to put everyone thru.

real_aardvark:
What would Gwenhyfaer do? I don't know. What would Brian Boitano do?

I like South Park a lot, unfortunately that's the extend of my Brian Boitano knowledge :)

2007-05-21 Reply Admin

Last post (for real this time).

2007-05-21 Reply Admin

I've got another way of putting it, let the job choose you and YOU do the selcting and screening... ;) http://ajaxwidgets.com/Blogs/thomas/how_to_choose_an_employer.bb

.t

2007-05-21 Reply Admin

Take off the hat and look? Failing that, you have to cheat on the "no communication" rule. The first person into the room stands in the middle. the next person onto the room turns right if the 1st person's hat is red, and left if it's blue.

2007-05-21 Reply Admin

You're pretty quick to throw out requirements.

2007-05-21 Reply Admin

Goedjn:
Take off the hat and look? Failing that, you have to cheat on the "no communication" rule. The first person into the room stands in the middle. the next person onto the room turns right if the 1st person's hat is red, and left if it's blue.

Days late and still dead wrong. Pick a page of the comments, read them, and find enlightenment.

2007-05-21 Reply Admin

[quote user="YourMoFoFriend"] <much deleted> 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"
"there is no tooth fairy"
a refusal to answer a "stupid question unrelated to the position"
an attempt to estimate number of teeth lost per night by kids based on population of countries that do believe in tooth fairy

One, but it's a really LONG trip.

2007-05-21 Reply Admin

Goedjn:
One, but it's a really LONG trip.

True, but how many stops will she have to make? :)) Actually that doesn't even matter, you already passed the test by simply not walking out :))

2007-05-22 Reply Admin

Vaibhav:
Not trying comment either way, but here is my experience. I was recruiting students for our Company at a college campus. Now in India, we sometimes pick up graduates who don't have a Computer Science background, but are from very good schools and have a high aptitude, and then train them on our cost to become programmers.
So, aside from testing them on their subject matter, I chose to give a very simple puzzle/teaser alongside. (It's not a regular interviewing practice at my company). The puzzle: http://www.thedailyriddle.com/2007/02/14/two-ropes/ "about how to measure 1.5 hours from two ropes which each take an hour to burn, and the burn rate is not even".

This one guy took forever to answer (while if you can figure it out, its a quick answer). So after like an hour, I asked him to give up but he presented me with a solution (based on which I hired him). He actually sat down and proved the solution mathematically and scientifically. He had got the answer immediately, but thought that he needed to test if it holds true scientifically. (I was given equations, and diagrams, and cross-sections, etc.)

Oh yeah, he is one of our better performers in the company today.

2007-05-22 Reply Admin

Suji:
Vaibhav:
So, aside from testing them on their subject matter, I chose to give a very simple puzzle/teaser alongside. (It's not a regular interviewing practice at my company). The puzzle: http://www.thedailyriddle.com/2007/02/14/two-ropes/ "about how to measure 1.5 hours from two ropes which each take an hour to burn, and the burn rate is not even".

Take one of the ropes. If it takes one hour to burn, there is some point along the rope (not necessarily the middle, as the burn rate is uneven) where it would have burned to after 30 minutes. This point will be reached after 30 minutes regardless of which end you start at. (Just as the point 10 minutes from one end is 50 minutes from the other.) Therefore, if you light the rope from both ends, both fires will reach the 30-minute mark at the same time -- after 30 minutes.

You can now measure 30 minutes, plus the 60 minutes from the other rope, and you have the 1.5 hours.

And, at the end of that 1.5 hours, you must guess the color of your hat, or pass. :-)

2007-05-22 Reply Admin

idiot man you weigh 3 vs 3 quarters if they are equal you only have 2 remaining to choose from if they are not equal you narrow it down faster to 3 then you weight 1vs1 and you know the answer. The light bulb in box is easy too i solved it in like 2 seconds you flip 2 switches, wait a while then flip on of the switches back. open the box one light bulb will be on and 2 off and one of the 2 off will be warm so you know which corresponds to which switch

2007-05-22 Reply Admin

Vic:
idiot man you weigh 3 vs 3 quarters if they are equal you only have 2 remaining to choose from if they are not equal you narrow it down faster to 3 then you weight 1vs1 and you know the answer.

Okay, you weigh 3-vs-3 and they are not equal. Which ones do you weigh next?

2007-05-23 Reply Admin

well, i think u would have to weigh 5 times (in the worst case, considering u were unlucky everytime you had to make a choice between the 2 sets when u found they were of unequal weights) to finally know the correct answer.

2007-05-23 Reply Admin

Alisha:
well, i think u would have to weigh 5 times (in the worst case, considering u were unlucky everytime you had to make a choice between the 2 sets when u found they were of unequal weights) to finally know the correct answer.

Saying "weigh 5 times" doesn't mean anything on its own. What would those 5 steps be?

2007-05-23 Reply Admin

okay.. I thought over it and .. can I change the answer to 4? :-D

The solution would be to divide the 8 quarters into 3 sets.

Weigh the two equal-sized sets against each other.

If you are lucky, the two sets will weigh the same, and one of the two remaining quarters (A n B) would be the odd one out, which can be easily determined by weighin A against any one (of the correct ones from the 2 sets of 3). If these two are of equal weight, B is the odd one out, else A is. So, in all, 2 steps.

Else, discard the set of two. 2) Make sets of 2 from these 6 now. Weigh any two sets again.

If you were lucky this time, again another step, and you know the correct answer. Answer = 3.

Else, discard the left out set. 3) Out of the remaining 4, say A B C D, take A n B first. If they weigh equal { take A n C, if they weigh equal, return D as output. else return C as output. } take A n C. if they weigh equal return B else return A.

Solves the problem in 4 steps in the worst case. :-D

2007-05-24 Reply Admin

Isn't it sobering to watch all the judgmental uber-coders here making a pigs ear of basic programming tasks?

2007-05-24 Reply Admin

Isn't it sobering to watch all the judgmental uber-coders here making a pigs ear of basic programming tasks?

real_aardvark · 2007-05-25 Reply Admin

YourMoFoFriend:
real_aardvark:
Who said I deem you an idiot? I'm assuming a context here, because, y'know, you kind of have to when you're dealing with a hypothetical case derived from a thread on a blog. For what it's worth, I do not deem you an idiot.
Right. No worries, just because you didn't call me an idiot now doesn't mean you can't do it later... and there we are, just a few lines down you do call me an idiot. Flattering. Misguided? Self-destructive? All because I think puzzles could be usefull?

Useful, btw. And not because you think that. There are tons of interviewers out there who are far less capable than you and rely on this clearly inadequate crutch. From what you've written, I can safely assume that you look further. 99% of the people who ask these questions don't. Thus the problem.

YourMoFoFriend:
real_aardvark:
I merely use "idiot" as a contextual and conversational short-form for the above.
As I said, just a few lines down :))

No, that would be "idiot". Contextually. And as shorthand. Not idiot. Without context, or shorthand.

How would you prefer me to explain that I am using five letters of the alphabet to summarise the position I am taking without trying to cause offence, at the same time as I attempt to explain that I hae a problem with the rationale for your position?

YourMoFoFriend:
Personally I used to ask a "tooth fairy" type of a question rather than a puzzle, but that wouldn't make a difference to you, would it? Let me see if I get it right: 1. Puzzles and such are unacceptable on interviews 2. When asked they indicate two things: the company is no good and the interviewer is an idiot. 3. At this point the right action is to walk, or stay just to dance when the offer comes and you decline
Does that sum it up OK?

If you say so. (1) They're pointless even if asked by somebody (such as yourself) who can discriminate between answers. (2) Not necessarily. This is a sliding scale. In Tom Lehrer's words ("The Old College Song"), "Soon we'll be sliding down the razor-blade of life..." (3) Absolutely. One has one's pride. I can be reached under the freeway bridge at ...

YourMoFoFriend:
real_aardvark:
And what's this about "a short but passionate speech a-la "I've read Marx, capitlism sucks?" A slightly swivel-eyed extrapolation, surely?

Links are for sissies. Here's the original quote.

gwenhyfaer:
We live in a world where employers want interchangeable assembly-line operatives in every role, where real individualism and flair are banished in favour of unquestioning conformity, where people are governed by the kind of idiots who think that hollow corporate-mandated "morale boosters" are better than actually treating people like something other than SKUs, where anyone who isn't a "team player" is automatically relegated to the scrapheap, where having an ego - kind of necessary for pride in one's work and the willingness to defend one's beliefs - is a problem in the workplace, where some poor ready-brainwashed fuckwit on this thread actually thought that responding to me with "No hire, not a team player" did anything other than prove the very point I was making...
You know what? Their risks are low enough already.

If I read you correctly, this quote is evidence enough that Gwenhyfaer is either (a) a Commie (simplistic, but a nice little "boo" label) or (b) a Trotskyist (which country? which International?) or (c) a Stalinist.

So many choices, so little time.

On the other hand, (s)he could just be commenting, in his/her usual uncompromising way, on the crap that anyone in this industry has to go through before getting, and fulfilling, a job. Yes, I think that's it. No politics at all.

Though I'd probably class Gwenhyfaer as a left-wing anarchist, never having met him/her.

Much the best thing to be.

2007-05-27 Reply Admin

I could not stop laughing at these comments. :-)

2007-05-29 Reply Admin

In the hat riddle, to insure that at least one of the players gets the answer correct 100% of the time, do the following:

After they enter the room, the players form a triangle and face inward. At the same time, say the color of the hat of the person standing to your right. The team will win every time.

MrBester · 2007-05-29 Reply Admin

I can't believe there's still comments about the hat problem. By the time this argument is done Grandpa will have died. I'm with gwenhyfaer as far as stupid interview "riddles" go. You ask me stuff about the job you're thinking of employing me in, fine. You ask me about what jobs I've done in the past, fine. You ask me inane bibble about vending machines that don't dispense properly (the answer is: no quarters required, just three signs stating "Out of order". Preferably magic marker on cardboard) then don't be surprised if I'm not particularly interested. I might not walk out, as it could just be a poor graduate of interviewer school, but the interviewer is the point of contact between me and the company. An unhappy interviewee doesn't put that company at the top of the list when offers come in.

In other news, I'm rubbish at Halo (and most FPS for that matter), but oddly enough, I'm a crack shot IRL. Funny old world, but I know which I prefer when the space lizards attempt to take over...

2007-05-29 Reply Admin

ok, I only got throught the first 13 pages of comments and was shocked nobody said to the 8 coins a flat easy 3 weighings regardless of heavier or lighter...

weigh 2 against 2. you now have a control group of 4 regardless of outcome.

weigh 2 controls against 2 unidentified, now you know the odd one out is either the 2 you just weighed or the other 2.

weigh one of those 2 against your control. if it balances it's that one, if not it's the other.

2007-05-29 Reply Admin

er... if it doesn't balance it's that one... if not the other.

stupid words getting in the way of my thinking.

2007-05-30 Reply Admin

Hatless:
In the hat riddle, to insure that at least one of the players gets the answer correct 100% of the time, do the following:
After they enter the room, the players form a triangle and face inward. At the same time, say the color of the hat of the person standing to your right. The team will win every time.

Apparently, you didn't read the rules, did you? (Don't worry, you're not alone. At least you didn't suggest cheating.)

The group shares a hypothetical $3 million prize if at least one player guesses correctly and no players guess incorrectly.

Your "solution" will win only if all three people have the same hat color, which is only 25% of the time.

2007-05-30 Reply Admin

real_aardvark:
Useful, btw. And not because you think that. There are tons of interviewers out there who are far less capable than you and rely on this clearly inadequate crutch. From what you've written, I can safely assume that you look further. 99% of the people who ask these questions don't. Thus the problem.

Perhaps that's your experience. Mine been a bit different, but nevertheless it would appear that we agree on some points (there are bad interviewers and that does not necessarily mean the company is bad as well), and disagree on others (I think puzzles is a technique that could be useful, and you think they are always useless), not a bad result for a conversation with a total stranger :)

real_aardvark:
No, that would be "idiot". Contextually. And as shorthand. Not idiot. Without context, or shorthand. How would you prefer me to explain that I am using five letters of the alphabet to summarise the position I am taking without trying to cause offence, at the same time as I attempt to explain that I have a problem with the rationale for your position?

Summarize, btw ;) Well, one way would be to just agree with me :))). But your approach works as well, I'm fine with the idiot vs. "idiot" explanation :)

real_aardvark:
(1) They're pointless even if asked by somebody (such as yourself) who can discriminate between answers. (2) Not necessarily. This is a sliding scale. In Tom Lehrer's words ("The Old College Song"), "Soon we'll be sliding down the razor-blade of life..." (3) Absolutely. One has one's pride. I can be reached under the freeway bridge at ...

1. I think that the technique is only useful when used by "somebody who can discriminate between answers", but I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on that one :) 2. and 3. Funny :). This is one of those rare occasions when (sarcasm) (end sarcasm) tags are not needed :)

real_aardvark:
Links are for sissies. Here's the original quote.
gwenhyfaer:
We live in a world where employers want interchangeable assembly-line operatives in every role, where real individualism and flair are banished in favour of unquestioning conformity, where people are governed by the kind of idiots who think that hollow corporate-mandated "morale boosters" are better than actually treating people like something other than SKUs, where anyone who isn't a "team player" is automatically relegated to the scrapheap, where having an ego - kind of necessary for pride in one's work and the willingness to defend one's beliefs - is a problem in the workplace, where some poor ready-brainwashed fuckwit on this thread actually thought that responding to me with "No hire, not a team player" did anything other than prove the very point I was making... You know what? Their risks are low enough already.
If I read you correctly, this quote is evidence enough that Gwenhyfaer is either (a) a Commie (simplistic, but a nice little "boo" label) or (b) a Trotskyist (which country? which International?) or (c) a Stalinist. So many choices, so little time. On the other hand, (s)he could just be commenting, in his/her usual uncompromising way, on the crap that anyone in this industry has to go through before getting, and fulfilling, a job. Yes, I think that's it. No politics at all. Though I'd probably class Gwenhyfaer as a left-wing anarchist, never having met him/her. Much the best thing to be.

Numbered lists seem to work well here, so there it goes: 1. I'm afraid you did not read me correctly, I did not assume what she is for, from that little speech I can only see what she is against - capitalism (or rather senseless exploitation of men by their fellow men), hence my comment about the speech a-la "I've read Marx, capitalism sucks". 2. I doubt she is a Communist or a Stalinist, Trotskist... that's a possibility. If I had to guess I'd go with an anarchist or a nihilist though.

On an unrelated note, holly-molly, people still read this thread and even post new and improved wrong solutions to the hat and coins puzzles...??? Unreal :)

2007-05-31 Reply Admin

Grandpa:
Three players enter a room and a red or blue hat is 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 can see the other players' hats but not his own.
No communication of any sort is allowed, except for an initial strategy session before the game begins. 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. The group shares a hypothetical $3 million prize if at least one player guesses correctly and no players guess incorrectly.

What strategy would you use?

I don't know if anyone's responded to this, but I only had time to read through 7 pages of comments.

The question itself says no communication EXCEPT for the initial strategy session. Pick one person, tell him what color his hat is, and have everyone else pass.

There's nothing in the riddle preventing you from doing that, and you have have as many people playing as you want and it works 100% of the time.

2007-05-31 Reply Admin

Feek:
Grandpa:
(The three hats problem.)

I don't know if anyone's responded to this, but I only had time to read through 7 pages of comments.

Oh, only a few hundred responses. I'm sure there are plenty on the first 7 pages.

The question itself says no communication EXCEPT for the initial strategy session. Pick one person, tell him what color his hat is, and have everyone else pass.
There's nothing in the riddle preventing you from doing that, and you have have as many people playing as you want and it works 100% of the time.

The question says "except for an initial strategy session before the game begins". "Before the game begins" means that you haven't been given the hats yet.

2007-05-31 Reply Admin

Ken:
The question says "except for an initial strategy session before the game begins". "Before the game begins" means that you haven't been given the hats yet.

I'd say it's worded badly, then, because that's not the way I'm understanding it. However, I've never seen the question before it was posted on this forum, so I'll take your word for it.

In that case, I like the idea of swapping hats with another person, or am I out in left field with that one, too? :)

xavier · 2007-06-01 Reply Admin

Thus demonstrating your understanding of LIFO FIFO ;)

Addendum (2007-06-01 13:03): Or FILO even

ha - no job for me

xavier · 2007-06-01 Reply Admin

vt_mruhlin:
Saladin:
Quick. Given eight quarters -- one weighing more or less than the rest -- and a balance scale, if you were faced with the task of figuring out which was the odd coin out using the fewest weighings possible, what would you do?
Obviously, I pocket the quarters and leave this stupid interview, giving me enough change to buy a Coke and pay the highway toll on the way to my next (hopefully better) job interview.

I actually saw a good discussion of this one, and how that particular example can be used to guage programming skills. Correct solution was to do a binary sort on on. Put 4 coins on each side of the scale, discard the lighter half, weigh the remaining 4, then weigh the remaining two.....

Course the person who answers that correctly probably just heard it before. Nobody thinks about weighing quarters that fast.

I suppose that would be a great method if.... "one weighing more or less than the rest" you were lucky enough to not have discarded the odd man out by making the assumption that it was a heavier coin was the one used and not the lighter.....

2007-06-01 Reply Admin

whatever happened to only one person guesses - the other two pass. If the guesser is wearing blue - make eye contact with them, if the guesser is wearing red - look away. Some would call this cheating - but there is a 50% chance you won't have to work with them if you get the job.

2007-06-01 Reply Admin

weigh the quarters in pairs. If a pair balances - throw out both. If a pair does not balance -remove one of the coins and replace it with another coin. If that pair balances, the removed coin is the odd man out. If the pair does not balance, the coin remaining from the previous pairing is the odd man out.

2007-06-01 Reply Admin

Feek:
In that case, I like the idea of swapping hats with another person, or am I out in left field with that one, too? :)

You aren't allowed to see your own hat's color.

If you count "your hat" as the one you started with, then you can now see it on the other person's head. If you count "your hat" as the one you end up with, then you saw it prior to the swap.

2007-06-07 Reply Admin

SomeCoder:
Eggtastic:
Anonymous Coward:
Bit of an ax to grind, much? The WTF is good (a proper answer to a rather silly question), but the general assertion that brainteasers are worthless is silly. Obviously, there will be some people who suck at brainteasers who are great programmers, just as there are some people who flunked out of college who are great programmers, but it's still a valid item of interest. Anything that measures lateral thinking and makes interviews with soulless corporations a little more fun is a good thing in my book.

One problem is that these brain teasers do not test lateral thinking or problem solving skills. They test whether someone has read the same book of brain teasers. If the interviewer were inventing completely original brainteasers, they might possibly show an aptitude for original thought (but more likely the luck to identify some unusual trick having no application outside the specific brain teaser), but I sincerely doubt anyone is doing so. Instead, they pull a bunch from a favorite source. Those who recognize them and can put on a good show of pretending they are solving them for the first time look like geniuses. Those who do not, may or may not figure out the right trick fast enough to impress the interview. Not a terribly useful test.

Agreed 100%.

Alex, bravo on the write up for this.

Brain teasers are absolutely worthless in determining value. If I've heard it before, or read the same book as you, I'll get it immediately and be a genius.

As someone who hated brain teasers in school and isn't great at them, I am the one who gets hurt by companies using this kind of interviewing process. I know I'm not the world's greatest programmer but I do think I am a pretty good one with lots left to learn (and I'll always have lots left to learn). I think I would add value to a company. The fact that I can't solve a brain teaser means that I won't have a chance to prove that.

I am currently employed but having been through lots of interviews a few years ago, this really irritated me.

Captcha: Burned. That's pretty fitting.

2007-06-08 Reply Admin

yo mama:
Agreed 100%.
Alex, bravo on the write up for this.

Brain teasers are absolutely worthless in determining value. If I've heard it before, or read the same book as you, I'll get it immediately and be a genius.

As someone who hated brain teasers in school and isn't great at them, I am the one who gets hurt by companies using this kind of interviewing process. I know I'm not the world's greatest programmer but I do think I am a pretty good one with lots left to learn (and I'll always have lots left to learn). I think I would add value to a company. The fact that I can't solve a brain teaser means that I won't have a chance to prove that.

I am currently employed but having been through lots of interviews a few years ago, this really irritated me.

Captcha: Burned. That's pretty fitting.

So, basically you're saying that brainteasers are worthless because you are not good at them? I think you missed the bit where it was asserted that a proper application of this interviewing technique does not require you to actually solve the puzzle, but rather to see your approach to solving it. Even more so in case of a puzzle without a correct solution. In fact if you did know the answer and tried to pass it as you didn't and just solved it on the spot... that's a strike against you since you just proved yourself a liar. No one likes liars and if for nothing else just to weed out those that instead of saying "I know this" go on trying to fool the interviewer this puzzle thing is useful already.

2007-06-11 Reply Admin

Has your "team" finished any projects lately? Didn't think so.

2007-06-11 Reply Admin

John:
Has your "team" finished any projects lately? Didn't think so.

How is hiring people who demand "You give me this job right now or I walk" on an interview is a good team building strategy?

2007-06-13 Reply Admin

I have to admit, I have trouble coming up with a situation where a riddle would be really useful. Maybe if you were guarding a bridge and couldn't fight very well....

Here is a comic about another bad situation to use a riddle. In a warning prophesy.

http://www.thadguy.com/comic/the-riddle-prophesy/116/

2007-06-18 Reply Admin

Several of these questions are found in the book How Would You Move Mt. Fuji?

The sad reality is that nowadays, candidates will spend a lot more time reading that book and countless other Web sites telling them how to master puzzle interview questions. Meanwhile, they won't bother spending just as much time reading industry and trade publications. Furthermore, you have candidates who detail these interviews in their blogs (both rejects and actual job offer winners).

Then you have these employers who complain that so many candidates go to interviews not knowing anything about the company. They bemoan that applicants didn't bother reading the company Web site, don't know what products the company makes, what markets they try to serve, etc.

And why should they? I've spoken to candidates who used to study a lot about a company, ready to make proposals on how they could contribute to the bottom line. Instead, they were besieged by a whole bunch of both puzzle and behavioral interview questions, many of which have absolutely nothing to do with the actual job.

So candidates reason, why bother? They treat job interviews like any lottery with such poor chances of getting in, hoping to get lucky to have during their interview the questions that appeared in both Web sites and books like William Poundstone's and cash in with MSFT or GOOG-style stock options.

It gets even worse when some of those candidates become managers themselves. Instead of looking for truly talented people who know the business and have plans of building it further, they believe they must continue the fraternity hazing.

Some of us, management and employees, really want to concentrate on the work to be done. Working on Google Maps is one thing, we're not interested in plans for crossing bridges and lanterns. True work is what lights up our lives, including managers who bring such things to life!

2007-06-19 Reply Admin

What is your point, in relation to the subject matter I mean?

2007-07-17 Reply Admin

Guys,

A few things:

there is nothing about the number of hats available in the room so looking at other peoples hats wont help at all.
Your hat is 50% chance, red 50% change blue. Yes you could go into probabilities of 3 blues if you see the other 2 people wearing blue but in a coin toss the coin toss before does not impact the coin toss currently.

Notice people can pass and only 1 person needs to guess correctly with no people guessing incorrectly. The obvious answer is have 2 people pass and the other person guess. The person can look at the other other hats if you want but at the end of the day it doesnt batter, tt's a 50/50 either heads or tails (i.e. red or blue).

2007-07-26 Reply Admin

I know that you won't see this reply, but I have to say it anyway. It's not a 50/50 chance. The reasons have been stated and thoroughly explained several hundred times over the eighteen pages of this continuing debate.

Please, please - I hope this is the last post on this quite frankly distressing thread.

Job Interview 2.0: Now With Riddles!

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