The Daily WTF: Curious Perversions in Information Technology

2007-04-23 Reply Admin

emh:
Then I told him I was withdrawing my application for the position. As I walked out, the other person in the room (whom I had erroneously assumed to be a developer) ran after me, introduced himself as the interviewers' boss, and asked why I was leaving. I explained that I didn't want to work for a know-it-all who wasn't, but had a closed mind to other folks' ideas. He tried and failed to convince me to stay.
lol who was closed minded again?

Not necessarily the previous poster. I wouldn't want to work for a boss who had that kind of attitude.

2007-04-23 Reply Admin

AGould:
el jaybird:
I was feeling OK until all my friends started laughing about the BS formulas on the reference sheet...
The prof got the last laugh, of course. muhahaha.

I'd call foul on that in that position - I'm paying for an education, not play "stump the student". If you want me to memorize the formulas, then don't allow a reference sheet. If you give me a formula sheet, I expect it to be correct.

Students don't realize how much power they can have in a college, especially in channels. I've been given a free auditing/re-write of the exam because we could prove the prof had completely failed to teach the material (evidenced by the fact that over half the class failed - there was a lineup at the Dean's office that day).

When I was in college, I had taken 2 semesters of chemistry and 2 more of physics. There was a requirement of one more of either subject. I didn't like physics, but was horrified at the thought of taking bio-chemistry, so I took the physics-3 class.

On day-one in September, the guy came in and said "My name is Dr xxx and to show you I mean business, here is a pop-quiz for 20% of your grade". He meant it too. On day-two, he told us he would give us the formulas for the final (no midterm exam), BUT in class he kept writing the formulas in Korean. When the non-Koreans in the class queried him what he was writing, he'd say stuff like: "force=mass*acceleration", only using the corresponding Korean words. Then he'd remind us that the formulas were only symbols, and that we needed to understand the underlying meaning.

I didn't trust this guy, so I memorized all the formulas anyway.

On the final exam, he kept true to his word: the formula sheet was provided - in Korean. The one Korean kid left in the class was laughing, while everyone else, except me, spent the entire exam pondering summer school (I aced the class).

akatherder · 2007-04-23 Reply Admin

bonzombiekitty:
I personally would consider it a good thing. If I was a manager, I'd want people to tell me when I'm being a jackass. Provided, of course, that I'm actually being a jackass. I don't want a bunch of yes-men who are going to sit meekly and take undeserved crap I may (inadvertently) dish out to them. I can see myself making a situation like that just to see if the candidate has some backbone and will stand up to me.

That's actually a pretty good rationalization of it.

Being in my shoes, I know I reacted childishly and spitefully out of anger and embarrassment. I could have said something like "Hold up there, you're being disrespectful and you need to give me the appropriate information to answer the question." if I had any intent of considering the job.

2007-04-23 Reply Admin

Saarus:
emh:
Then I told him I was withdrawing my application for the position. As I walked out, the other person in the room (whom I had erroneously assumed to be a developer) ran after me, introduced himself as the interviewers' boss, and asked why I was leaving. I explained that I didn't want to work for a know-it-all who wasn't, but had a closed mind to other folks' ideas. He tried and failed to convince me to stay.
lol who was closed minded again?
It was probably best for everyone, you know. Supposing the person he schooled could very well have been his immediate supervisor-to-be, the first few weeks on the job would have been pretty... awkward.

In fact, the interviewer WOULD have been my boss.

I have no problem disagreeing with superiors, or with my subordinates disagreeing with me - one can disagree without being disagreeable.

There are two important things (IMHO):

make a reasonable argument for the disagreement, and back it up with facts, while not making it personal
if the solutions are essentially the same, pick your battles - don't go to war when it's just a different yet comparable way to skin a cat

vt_mruhlin · 2007-04-23 Reply Admin

AGould:
I'm paying for an education, not play "stump the student".

There's always the "real world education" aspect. If you don't know how to tell your boss this latest assignment is a joke, you're going to be doing a lot of crappy work.

/Though my latest assignment is the return of one that I said was crap 6 months ago. It's less crappy now, but not by a wide margin...

2007-04-23 Reply Admin

snoofle:
emh:
Then I told him I was withdrawing my application for the position. As I walked out, the other person in the room (whom I had erroneously assumed to be a developer) ran after me, introduced himself as the interviewers' boss, and asked why I was leaving. I explained that I didn't want to work for a know-it-all who wasn't, but had a closed mind to other folks' ideas. He tried and failed to convince me to stay.
lol who was closed minded again?
It wasn't that the interviewer was right and I was wrong, the question was what is the minimum number of times you could do something to determine the required answer. His answer was 3, mine was 2 - it just required some mathematically valid, yet out-of-the-box thinking.

The interviewer's manager was a decent guy, but he wasn't the guy I'd have been working for, so I chose to politely withdraw.

a-ha - So it was the good ol' 8 coin question. You have 8 identical coins and a balance scale. 1 of the 8 coins weighs more than the others. What is the least number of times you can use the scale to find out the 1 coin that weighs more than the other 7? I like that one.

captcha - howdy ... benadams says howdy!

emurphy · 2007-04-23 Reply Admin

G Money:
I think this is the mark of a junior (read: IROC).

I love when I get to learn something new. (For the benefit of others: Idiot Right Out of College, and www.acronymfinder.com)

2007-04-23 Reply Admin

nobody:
I did have one interviewer ask me about synchronization objects for multithreading. He insisted critical sections were used between processes and mutexes within a process. It is the other way around; I was right. I didn't get the job, and I don't know if he blindly went around using more expensive mutexes when a critical section would do (a critical section will simply not work between processes, so he couldn't do it the other way) or if there was some other reason he never called back.

There are rumors of this as a subtle stress interview technique. The interviewer takes an incorrect position and sticks to it, to see how the candidate stands up for what they know to be correct.

The other 99.9999999999999999999% of the time, the interviewer is simply wrong and doesn't know it. Even then it's best to be polite but firm, and maybe say, "Well, we disagree on this one."

emurphy · 2007-04-23 Reply Admin

AGould:
el jaybird:
I was feeling OK until all my friends started laughing about the BS formulas on the reference sheet...
The prof got the last laugh, of course. muhahaha.

I'd call foul on that in that position - I'm paying for an education, not play "stump the student". If you want me to memorize the formulas, then don't allow a reference sheet. If you give me a formula sheet, I expect it to be correct.

Perhaps it had something like "this sheet is BS" 2/3 of the way down the page. But that's still unreasonable - it assumes the student will read the sheet from top to bottom. (Contrast with the recent sidebar story about a "rate us from 1 to 10 in these categories" web survey that included "for QC, please answer 6 here", presumably to weed out people blanket-answering 1 or 10 from people actually reading and thinking.)

emurphy · 2007-04-23 Reply Admin

lemonhead:
a-ha - So it was the good ol' 8 coin question. You have 8 identical coins and a balance scale. 1 of the 8 coins weighs more than the others. What is the least number of times you can use the scale to find out the 1 coin that weighs more than the other 7? I like that one.

Friendly nitpick: "identical-looking".

If it actually was 8 coins, then I bet I not only know the two-weighing solution, but also know the non-optimal three-weighing solution that the interviewer had in mind.

If you like this sort of thing, then I recommend rec.puzzles (if you dig old-school Usenet and/or nitpicking) and/or groups.yahoo.com/group/puzzleteasers (you have to deal with English written with a Bangalore accent, but that's probably a useful skill in IT anyhow).

its me · 2007-04-23 Reply Admin

RonaldRoss:
the best is when the interviewer asks you a logic puzzle that you already know the answer to.

I think not.... The point of a logic puzzle in an interview is to find out how a person thinks, how they break down a problem and solve it. If you just know the answer then the question tends not to count...

When being an interviewer I'd rather see someone struggle with a puzzle and give me a wrong answer, than to quickly regurgitate the correct answer. The point is the process, not the memorization of stupid puzzles....

-Me

2007-04-23 Reply Admin

its me:
RonaldRoss:
the best is when the interviewer asks you a logic puzzle that you already know the answer to.

I think not.... The point of a logic puzzle in an interview is to find out how a person thinks, how they break down a problem and solve it. If you just know the answer then the question tends not to count...

When being an interviewer I'd rather see someone struggle with a puzzle and give me a wrong answer, than to quickly regurgitate the correct answer. The point is the process, not the memorization of stupid puzzles....

-Me

Then quit using stupid puzzles. Chances are, you'll run into several people who already know the answers.

2007-04-23 Reply Admin

its me:
RonaldRoss:
the best is when the interviewer asks you a logic puzzle that you already know the answer to.

I think not.... -Me

To quote Descartes: "I Think, therefore I am."

So, logic dictates that since you think not, you are not. POOF! "its me" disappears.

2007-04-23 Reply Admin

emurphy:
lemonhead:
a-ha - So it was the good ol' 8 coin question. You have 8 identical coins and a balance scale. 1 of the 8 coins weighs more than the others. What is the least number of times you can use the scale to find out the 1 coin that weighs more than the other 7? I like that one.

Friendly nitpick: "identical-looking".

If it actually was 8 coins, then I bet I not only know the two-weighing solution, but also know the non-optimal three-weighing solution that the interviewer had in mind.

If you like this sort of thing, then I recommend rec.puzzles (if you dig old-school Usenet and/or nitpicking) and/or groups.yahoo.com/group/puzzleteasers (you have to deal with English written with a Bangalore accent, but that's probably a useful skill in IT anyhow).

For the benefit of those who don't know the answer:

Simple answer: binary search: split 4-and-4, then 2-and-2, then 1-and-1: 3 weighings

Better answer: split into groups of 3, 3 and 2, and weigh 3-and-3

if 3-and-3 are the same, it must be one of the other two: weigh them 1-and-1: 2 weighings

if 3-and-3 are different: take the lighter (or heavier - depending upon whether you're looking for the lighter or heavier item), and weight any 2 of them as: 1-and-1 --- if the 1-and-1 are the same, it's the third one: 2 weighings --- if the 1-and-1 are different, it's the lighter (heavier) one: 2 weighings

2007-04-23 Reply Admin

Pff. Bullshit. Just because someone gives you some tools they are not fit to solve all your problems. If you choose unwisely, if you choose the comb for fixing the tire, then it is your problem. University is there to teach you thinking, not applying tools.

But not nice anyway. I had a prof once who sensed my problems during an 'take all with you,'-exam (and if you do not know your way in the area it won't do you any good). I had known the field because of a former study and thus learned with my old materials but he had used one different definition. So he came along and just handed me over his notes for the lecture and one minute later I had looked up the definition I had missed/he had used in one task.

2007-04-23 Reply Admin

Actually, "force=mass*acceleration" is incorrect. It should read "force=dp/dt", where p denotes the momentum. So, besides being an ignorant asshole your Dr xxx also was, lets say, dumb.

2007-04-23 Reply Admin

F = M x A is the basis of statics. A non-moving object such as a bridge structure has zero momentum.

2007-04-23 Reply Admin

Mr.45cm:
Actually, "force=mass*acceleration" is incorrect. It should read "force=dp/dt", where p denotes the momentum. So, besides being an ignorant asshole your Dr xxx also was, lets say, dumb.

force = mass*acceleration in Newtonian physics, where mass is invariant with time. It's also the only version that can be taught in a non-calculus physics course. The difference between the two definitions is irrelevant (in calculus-based physics classes, where both can be taught) unless you involve relativity, which most third-semester physics courses do not. Don't be an idiot.

2007-04-23 Reply Admin

Fred:
F = M x A is the basis of statics. A non-moving object such as a bridge structure has zero momentum.

It also has zero net acceleration (I remind you that the A in that formula is net acceleration and the F is net force). The formulae are equivalent in Newtonian physics, and it would be perfectly possible to calculate contributions to momentum rather than to acceleration to determine forces and apply Newton's Third Law. It's just unconventional and probably less convenient, although I haven't tried it.

2007-04-23 Reply Admin

Although static objects are not "accelerating" by definition, F = M x A is the relationship typically used to analyze static systems, probably because gravitational acceleration is a major effect.

2007-04-23 Reply Admin

Mr.45cm:
Actually, "force=mass*acceleration" is incorrect. It should read "force=dp/dt", where p denotes the momentum. So, besides being an ignorant asshole your Dr xxx also was, lets say, dumb.

You're an idiot. If your "you didn't write it exactly how I would - you're wrong - nyah nyah" attitude of yours carries over into software, any job you hold would have to be a WTF.

p = mv a = dv/dt

F = dp/dt = d(mv)/dt = m dv/dt = ma

In fact, "p = mv" is even true with photons in Special Relativity, with "m" being the relativistic rather than rest mass (0).

"F = ma" is Newton's Second Law. It is a much more common statement than "F = dp/dt" in classical physics, and equally correct. You might as well go around stabbing people for saying "po-TAY-to" instead of "po-TAH-to".

2007-04-23 Reply Admin

anonymous:
Mr.45cm:
Actually, "force=mass*acceleration" is incorrect. It should read "force=dp/dt", where p denotes the momentum. So, besides being an ignorant asshole your Dr xxx also was, lets say, dumb.

You're an idiot. If your "you didn't write it exactly how I would - you're wrong - nyah nyah" attitude of yours carries over into software, any job you hold would have to be a WTF.

p = mv a = dv/dt

F = dp/dt = d(mv)/dt = m dv/dt = ma

In fact, "p = mv" is even true with photons in Special Relativity, with "m" being the relativistic rather than rest mass (0).

"F = ma" is Newton's Second Law. It is a much more common statement than "F = dp/dt" in classical physics, and equally correct. You might as well go around stabbing people for saying "po-TAY-to" instead of "po-TAH-to".

Be more careful about throwing around the word "idiot", especially when you are wrong.

Newton's formulation was in fact F = dp/dt (using his fluxion notation instead of Liebniz's, of course), and that is the correct definition. F = ma does not hold when dp/dt != ma, such as under special relativity.

Now that would be neither here nor there except that you decided to be a chump and call someone who was right an idiot. Again, the guy you called an idiot was correct. Your answer on the other hand is a classical approximation that breaks down near the speed of light.

In case you are having trouble following this: Him: right You: wrong

2007-04-24 Reply Admin

The correct answer would've been "Well, I haven't had a chance to use DB2 yet, but I've worked with other relational database systems like Oracle, Microsoft SQL Server, and with various flat-file databases going back to my early teens."

It wouldn't have mattered. If you didn't know what DB2 was you obviously didn't have any IBM Mainframe experience. Even if you could BS through DB2, MVS, CICS, and TSO would have really stumped you. You really didn't have the job experience they were looking for, not even remotely close.

2007-04-24 Reply Admin

Rage Monkey:
Newton's formulation was in fact F = dp/dt (using his fluxion notation instead of Liebniz's, of course), and that is the correct definition. F = ma does not hold when dp/dt != ma, such as under special relativity.

Not with m defined as relativistic mass (m = E/c^2), as I explained. Read my post again. In some circles, it's common to define m in this way, and m_0 as the rest mass (0 in the case of a photon).

I also explained that this was the more common terminology in classical mechanics. In my school at least, special relativity was not the focus of Physics III. What makes you think that special relativity is even relevant?

Now that would be neither here nor there except that you decided to be a chump and call someone who was right an idiot. Again, the guy you called an idiot was correct.

You've got that backwards. As I stated, both are correct, but he was an ass about insisting his was the only correct one.

ActionMan · 2007-04-24 Reply Admin

I went for an interview along with some other people where we had to sit an exam to get invited back for a second interview.

One question was "when is it appropriate to use multiple inheritance".

I wrote half a page on the caution that should be exercised and the few, but important uses that it does have.

Another guy just wrote "NEVER!!".

He got the job, I got a data pre-processing job elsewhere.

operagost · 2007-04-24 Reply Admin

James Schend:
For instance, I was doing a phone screening with Google and the interviewer asked me (Forgive me if I get this wrong, I'm going from memory) what a .eml file was and what limitation it had. Forgetting for the moment that this question was utterly irrelevant to what I was interviewing for, and that it could be easily found on Google in like 10 seconds, I told her that I was unfamiliar with that file format, and asked for a hint. She told me it has to do with email, so I replied that while I'm familiar with most email clients, I've only done administration on Lotus Notes, but I could make an educated guess: the file format is a database of Outlook email, and the limitation is either a 2GB or 4GB filesize. Turns out I got it right.

No, you didn't. Outlook uses .pst and Outlook express uses .dbx. Both, however, use .eml for plain-text exports of individual messages.

2007-04-24 Reply Admin

what I did next, which was to create an entire recipe out of whole cloth and explain it to him. It wasn't until next day that I was told that the group included the hotel's manager, head chef and the managers of a few other hotels. I was so fired.

Well of course. If anything, cloth would be part of the entree, not the dessert. Duh.

2007-04-24 Reply Admin

RobertB:
Common Object Module[/url] for program interaction.
Needless to say, I didn't get the job...

COM = Component Object Model

2007-04-24 Reply Admin

operagost:
James Schend:
For instance, I was doing a phone screening with Google and the interviewer asked me (Forgive me if I get this wrong, I'm going from memory) what a .eml file was and what limitation it had. Forgetting for the moment that this question was utterly irrelevant to what I was interviewing for, and that it could be easily found on Google in like 10 seconds, I told her that I was unfamiliar with that file format, and asked for a hint. She told me it has to do with email, so I replied that while I'm familiar with most email clients, I've only done administration on Lotus Notes, but I could make an educated guess: the file format is a database of Outlook email, and the limitation is either a 2GB or 4GB filesize. Turns out I got it right.
No, you didn't. Outlook uses .pst and Outlook express uses .dbx. Both, however, use .eml for plain-text exports of individual messages.

Why was Google asking trivia questions, anyway? I'd expected better of them.

2007-04-24 Reply Admin

snoofle:
Over the years, I've had a few interviews with folks who would ask a question, and then tell me my answer was wrong. That's usually a pretty good sign that:
a) the person doesn't understand the subject matter (assuming YOU know what you are talking about) b) the person doesn't want to hear alternatives to their own thoughts/perspective c) the person expects you to think as they do, and not on your own d) if you work with/for them, you will end up being a yes-man or quitting

e) the person was trying to see how you would react to the situation: if you were a yes-man, were stubborn, or some kind of diplomatic in-between.

2007-04-24 Reply Admin

anonymous:
Why was Google asking trivia questions, anyway? I'd expected better of them.

Perhaps to see if you have the balls to say that this question can be answered in seconds with a simple google search so there's no point in memorizing such information. When we interview candidates for developer positions, we don't bother asking trivial questions anyone can find out online. This is also why MCP certifications and the like carry no weight here. It just proves you're able to memorize what the proper attribute in some xml tag of the application's web.config is to enable impersonation. It also proves that you don't mind spending your valuable time memorizing specifications. It doesn't prove at all that you have any clue at all what impersonation means, what it is good for and when it's useful.

2007-04-24 Reply Admin

emurphy:
lemonhead:
a-ha - So it was the good ol' 8 coin question. You have 8 identical coins and a balance scale. 1 of the 8 coins weighs more than the others. What is the least number of times you can use the scale to find out the 1 coin that weighs more than the other 7? I like that one.

Friendly nitpick: "identical-looking".

If it actually was 8 coins, then I bet I not only know the two-weighing solution, but also know the non-optimal three-weighing solution that the interviewer had in mind.

If you like this sort of thing, then I recommend rec.puzzles (if you dig old-school Usenet and/or nitpicking) and/or groups.yahoo.com/group/puzzleteasers (you have to deal with English written with a Bangalore accent, but that's probably a useful skill in IT anyhow).

Could everyone in this thread really have missed this?

The answer is 1.

The question is "What is the least number of times you can use the scale to find out the 1 coin that weighs more than the other 7?". And of course, we can assume that the coins are "identical in appearance" and not actually identical. If they were identical, then the problem would have contradicted itself, and therefore be invalid. Anyway...

The problem does not specify how much heavier the heavy coin really is. Because the scenario is wide open, we are free to speculate that the heavy coin might weigh more than all the other coins combined. Therefore, you CAN (if lucky) determine with absolutely certainty the heavier coin in 1 step. It's plainly obvious: If you, by chance, happen to put the heavy coin on one side and all the other coins on the other side, and the 1-coin side wins, then you have solved the problem in 1 step.

Yes yes, common sense would dictate that binary search is the best way to solve the problem. However, that is not relevant to the question poised. Study the problem over and over if you wish. Put forth solutions on how to fix the wording of the problem so that 2 is the correct answer. It doesn't matter. For the problem, as it was written, the answer is 1.

2007-04-24 Reply Admin

jisakujien:
At least you didn't have a school teacher send a letter home because you would not accept that a mile was shorter than a kilometer.

Don't be silly... of course a mile is longer than a kilometer. Everyone knows Americans like to build things bigger.

Note for the humorless: I'm being sarcastic.

2007-04-24 Reply Admin

At one interview a few years ago I told a lady from HR that I ranked personality profiling right up there with astrology... I didn't want the job anyway.

By the next interview at a different company I had modified that stance to: "I believe they are a valuable tool for gaining insights into a person's character and aptitudes" - I got that one.

amandahugginkiss · 2007-04-24 Reply Admin

snoofle:
On the final exam, he kept true to his word: the formula sheet was provided - in Korean.

Perhaps you should have responded in Afrikaans. After all, if it's only the underlying meaning that's important...

amandahugginkiss · 2007-04-24 Reply Admin

AndrewB:
The problem does not specify how much heavier the heavy coin really is. Because the scenario is wide open, we are free to speculate that the heavy coin might weigh more than all the other coins combined. Therefore, you CAN (if lucky) determine with absolutely certainty the heavier coin in 1 step. It's plainly obvious: If you, by chance, happen to put the heavy coin on one side and all the other coins on the other side, and the 1-coin side wins, then you have solved the problem in 1 step.

If the coin was that heavy, you wouldn't need a scale to determine the difference. If the coin really is that heavy, the answer would be 0.

2007-04-24 Reply Admin

At a job interview for a c# developer, I was made to sit a small exam. One of the questions was this:

Write the output of this program.

        string s = "";
        for (int a = 1; a <= 5; a++)
        {
            s += "\r\n" + a + ":";
            for (int j = 1; j <= 5; j++)
            {
                s += j;
            }
        }
        Console.WriteLine(s);

I was faced with a quandry. Was this a trick question or just a mistake. Was the answer what the output was supposed to be, or what it was (an infinite loop).

So I decided to run the risk of "schooling the interviewer" and I got the job.

2007-04-24 Reply Admin

I mucked up my last post. I typed the correct code, the code in the exam was:

string s = ""; for (int a = 1; a <= 5; a++) { s += "\r\n" + a + ":"; for (int j = 1; j <= 5; a++) { s += j; } } Console.WriteLine(s);

2007-04-24 Reply Admin

AndrewB:
emurphy:
lemonhead:
a-ha - So it was the good ol' 8 coin question. You have 8 identical coins and a balance scale. 1 of the 8 coins weighs more than the others. What is the least number of times you can use the scale to find out the 1 coin that weighs more than the other 7? I like that one.

Friendly nitpick: "identical-looking".

If it actually was 8 coins, then I bet I not only know the two-weighing solution, but also know the non-optimal three-weighing solution that the interviewer had in mind.

If you like this sort of thing, then I recommend rec.puzzles (if you dig old-school Usenet and/or nitpicking) and/or groups.yahoo.com/group/puzzleteasers (you have to deal with English written with a Bangalore accent, but that's probably a useful skill in IT anyhow).

Could everyone in this thread really have missed this?
The answer is 1.

The question is "What is the least number of times you can use the scale to find out the 1 coin that weighs more than the other 7?". And of course, we can assume that the coins are "identical in appearance" and not actually identical. If they were identical, then the problem would have contradicted itself, and therefore be invalid. Anyway...

The problem does not specify how much heavier the heavy coin really is. Because the scenario is wide open, we are free to speculate that the heavy coin might weigh more than all the other coins combined. Therefore, you CAN (if lucky) determine with absolutely certainty the heavier coin in 1 step. It's plainly obvious: If you, by chance, happen to put the heavy coin on one side and all the other coins on the other side, and the 1-coin side wins, then you have solved the problem in 1 step.

Yes yes, common sense would dictate that binary search is the best way to solve the problem. However, that is not relevant to the question poised. Study the problem over and over if you wish. Put forth solutions on how to fix the wording of the problem so that 2 is the correct answer. It doesn't matter. For the problem, as it was written, the answer is 1.

I say the answer is 0.

Who says you need to use the scales at all? Just compare them in your hands one at a time.

2007-04-24 Reply Admin

Simetrical:
Mr.45cm:
Actually, "force=mass*acceleration" is incorrect. It should read "force=dp/dt", where p denotes the momentum. So, besides being an ignorant asshole your Dr xxx also was, lets say, dumb.
force = mass*acceleration in Newtonian physics, where mass is invariant with time. It's also the only version that can be taught in a non-calculus physics course. The difference between the two definitions is irrelevant (in calculus-based physics classes, where both can be taught) unless you involve relativity, which most third-semester physics courses do not. Don't be an idiot.

The difference between F=ma and F=dp/dt is relevant even if we stick to Newtownian physics. We can have systems whose mass varies, not because of relativistic effect, but due to variations in (classical) mass.

e.g. a leaking water tank placed on a trolley which has a negligible friction with the surface. The leakage causes decrease in the mass of the system over time (when the leaked water is considered external to the system). Due to a loss in the horizontal component of the momentum the water leaving, the tank can actually get propelled in the opposite direction!

As another example, consider an open-top truck sliding frictionlessly along a straight road. It is raining heavily and the truck collects rainfall, causing the system to increase in mass over time. (Assume no leakage and no overflow for simplicity.) If the rain falls vertically, it won't contribute to the horizontal momentum of the truck. The added mass would cause the truck to decelerate.

In these examples, you'll find the formula F=dp/pt more useful than F=ma (because F != ma when m is not constant).

2007-04-24 Reply Admin

Alan:
I mucked up my last post. I typed the correct code, the code in the exam was:
string s = ""; for (int a = 1; a <= 5; a++) { s += "\r\n" + a + ":"; for (int j = 1; j <= 5; a++) { s += j; } } Console.WriteLine(s);

Thanks, I was missing the CodeSOD today!

Squiggle · 2007-04-24 Reply Admin

G Money:
Jeff Lewis:
Don't be afraid to say "I don't know."
I've asked people, "What is polymorphism?" And had them give me the Latin derivation of the word. Interesting, perhaps, bu t not helpful.

I think this is the mark of a junior (read: IROC). In school, on a test, you're told to "just write something; you might get partial marks". Juniors approach job interviews like an academic test. Experience teaches you when to say "I don't know".

Also, when you're a Junior, interviewing more a process of asking for a job. When you're more experienced, interviewing is more a process of determining whether you can reach a mutally acceptable arrangement with the employing organization

Quoted for truth.

Right now I'm job hunting with a few years of experience behind me for the first time, and it's really quite liberating. I'm in no hurry to leave this job, but I'm trying to get a career in something that's more "what I like". It's a nice feeling to call an agent about a job and be able to say "Nah, don't bother. It's not really what I'm looking for."

Thanks to this forum, I've got some excellent advice about interviews.

Also of interest is an excellent article by Rands found at http://www.randsinrepose.com/archives/2007/03/21/the_sanity_check.html

2007-04-24 Reply Admin

diaphanein:
When I interview candidates, one of my stated goals is to get the candidate to admit they don't know something...

One of the best interviewer tips I've heard in a long time.

If someone says 'I don't know' they can learn. If they don't they're doomed to be forever ignorant.

2007-04-24 Reply Admin

It's also good practise to ensure you learn what the interviewer's job titles actually are. Especially before you launch into, as a backend DBA support person, why developement never listen to you and why they just do what they want and don't care about support's position in the company, you then learn that the two people interviewing you were the developement manager and his lead developer. What was worse I only found out after the agency called me and asked why I made a complete prat of myself!

Taz · 2007-04-24 Reply Admin

James Schend:
BTW: Lotus Notes? *The* reason I was interviewing. Never again will I work anywhere that uses that foul excretion of an email client. Just thinking about Lotus Notes makes the rage swell.

Ah, yes. Because Outlook/Exchange is several magnitudes of a better choice for business e-mail solutions. </sarcasm>

Just gotta love these OT slashdot comments. NOT.

And I'm not about to start a /. debate here either. Soooo not going there.

2007-04-24 Reply Admin

I did once interview a guy who ended up telling me why the screen-refresh algorithm in a certain 3270 terminal emulator was all wrong. I was pretty proud of that algorithm, actually.

I recommended we hire the guy since he could present a solid technical argument (even though his ideas on screen refresh were obviously crap).

tezoatlipoca · 2007-04-24 Reply Admin

James Schend:
BTW: Lotus Notes? *The* reason I was interviewing. Never again will I work anywhere that uses that foul excretion of an email client. Just thinking about Lotus Notes makes the rage swell.

So completely off topic but I agree.

2007-04-24 Reply Admin

AGould:
el jaybird:
I was feeling OK until all my friends started laughing about the BS formulas on the reference sheet...
The prof got the last laugh, of course. muhahaha.

I'd call foul on that in that position - I'm paying for an education, not play "stump the student". If you want me to memorize the formulas, then don't allow a reference sheet. If you give me a formula sheet, I expect it to be correct.

Students don't realize how much power they can have in a college, especially in channels. I've been given a free auditing/re-write of the exam because we could prove the prof had completely failed to teach the material (evidenced by the fact that over half the class failed - there was a lineup at the Dean's office that day).

Have you never heard of grading on a curve? That's supposed to solve issues like this automatically. If the professor doesn't teach the material well, then most people won't get it, and the median will be lower.

2007-04-24 Reply Admin

Have you never heard of grading on a curve? That's supposed to solve issues like this automatically. If the professor doesn't teach the material well, then most people won't get it, and the median will be lower.

That solves the "going to school to get some paper qualifications" part. It does nothing for the "going to school to learn something" part.

2007-04-24 Reply Admin

Kudos to Dan for telling a WTF on himself. That takes real guts... and it means that he'll probably be the type of person to spot and prevent his own WTF's in the future.

Schooling the Interviewer

Leave a comment on “Schooling the Interviewer”