Comment by kamaal
1 day ago
>>e.g. I was asked about the structure of an inode in UNIX v6 - I told him I didn't know it but gave a general response about the type of information Unix-y systems keep in inodes, and with more detail about Linux; to add to it, for the role in question a knowledge of filesystem details was irrelevant
These sort of questions are far too common in these companies.
I have once been rejected by a company here in Bangalore, for not reading the interviewer's favourite paper(The one Google published on BigTable). Which according to him was so important anyone who hadn't read it and re-read it several times like him couldn't possibly be a coder.
This is despite finishing the take home assignment, implementing 3 more features onsite, more code review sessions, general interview sessions.
Some people are not serious about getting work done, and whatever they are claiming to do with hiring people. Unfortunately they are neither looking to hire people to get the work done, nor hiring the best.
Sometimes I wish interviewers were tested. E.g. mix some current well-rated colleagues into the mix, and see how they rated them. Of course that would only work in quite large companies.
But even mock interviews with current staff they know are current staff might help, as a means of weeding out questions that current, well-performing staff would fail.
I don't even blame these interviewers - most of them have never been given any training in how to interview, and it's not a skill they've ever been properly tested on in most cases. It's cruel to both sides to put untrained interviewers in that position.