I don't know what to make of this. Looks like a potential headache. As an engineer in an interview, we never get told what we're being scored on in advance (naming, speed, coming up with wonky edge-cases, scalability to 1million times workload, versatility, mentioning a bunch of relevant buzzwords (bloom filters!), confidence?).
This is one reason why most interviewing is a subjective clusterfuck (not just software, I suspect). I'd bet really good money that numerous companies would reject Linus, Carmack, etc.
Hence the giving of graphs and other media that are meant to project an idea of objectivity while reducing an engineer to a few quantities turns my stomach.
This is one reason why most interviewing is a subjective clusterfuck (not just software, I suspect). I'd bet really good money that numerous companies would reject Linus, Carmack, etc.
Hence the giving of graphs and other media that are meant to project an idea of objectivity while reducing an engineer to a few quantities turns my stomach.