News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Why are so many successful founding CEOs software engineers? by danielmarkbruce on Monday March 15, 2021 @07:23AM (#26464605)
You are assuming a lot. Many stanford phd's fail the google interview. I'd guess larry, sergey and zuckerberg had a pretty good chance of failing their own swe interviews...
Re:Why are so many successful founding CEOs software engineers? by pyrale on Monday March 15, 2021 @07:32AM (#26464673)
Maybe the issue is with the Google interview?

I mean, plenty of very capable people are filtered out of Google and go on to do great things. It is bound to happen when you receive hundreds of applications and hire one person.

Re:Why are so many successful founding CEOs software engineers? by onion2k on Monday March 15, 2021 @07:34AM (#26464694)
I am assuming a lot, but everything I've read about Larry, Sergey and Zuck tells me that they're pretty exceptional people (even if that doesn't extend to their coding ability, which I have no idea about). They're people who are driven, focused and hugely ambitious. If they don't have what it takes to pass a SWE interview then there's little hope for the rest of us.
Re:Why are so many successful founding CEOs software engineers? by tinco on Monday March 15, 2021 @07:50AM (#26464832)
I think the point is, that even if they are intelligent and capable and definitely contributed a lot to their initial codebases ( I don't know why you singled out Gates, but he most certainly did as well), all of these companies grew to the point where almost any code change requires a bunch of expertise with technologies that they probably have not been exposed to.

I don't know if they wouldn't get hired, I mean it's not like those companies never hire straight out of college, they obviously do, so expertise is not an absolute requirement. But they probably couldn't be hired as drop-in experienced SE's. Half their tech stacks are on technology that didn't even exist when they last touched code.

All of these CEO's are famous for their excellent early talent acquisition of software engineers. Microsoft and Apple for leveraging those engineers to initiate a new digital world, and Facebook and Google for attracting (and motivating) the worlds best to achieve global domination.

Re:Why are so many successful founding CEOs software engineers? by jbroson on Monday March 15, 2021 @11:35AM (#26467218)
If this is the standard that "they couldn't get hired TODAY" I'm sure that's not a very interesting fact worth discussing.

I mean if we reanimated Big Al Einstein today and he had a blind interview for a tenure track physics position at Princeton Physics dept he would probably fail. The field has changed too much although with months of prep he'd be able to catch up, the same as L & S could for SWE interviews.

Re:Why are so many successful founding CEOs software engineers? by onion2k on Monday March 15, 2021 @08:38AM (#26465310)
But they probably couldn't be hired as drop-in experienced SE's.

That's exactly what I said in my first post - "I doubt any of them could drop in to a high level coding role and be productive, but they could all do intern or junior level stuff."

Re:Why are so many successful founding CEOs software engineers? by jbroson on Monday March 15, 2021 @11:32AM (#26467171)
What? You honestly think the Stanford PhDs who created Google couldn't get hired as basic SWEs? Seriously? I mean if true that says a lot more about the SWE interviews than it does about Stanford PhDs.

I mean there are Yale JDs that fail the bar exam but no one would claim that the average Yale JD couldn't get hired as a Big Law associate or judicial clerk.

Re:Why are so many successful founding CEOs software engineers? by walto2 on Monday March 15, 2021 @11:46AM (#26467369)
In a very literal sense, that's exactly what's broken about the interview process in the software industry. The philosophy is to avoid false positives at all costs, so a high rate of false negatives is seen as OK. The prevailing advice is, just try your luck again in six months.
Re:Why are so many successful founding CEOs software engineers? by mlcrypto on Monday March 15, 2021 @12:41PM (#26468230)
That's the good thing about Bitcoin. I don't have to prove anything to anyone anymore. It doesn't matter where you work if you convert your fiat to the superior store of value
Re:Why are so many successful founding CEOs software engineers? by Alex3917 on Monday March 15, 2021 @11:54AM (#26467491)
> You honestly think the Stanford PhDs who created Google couldn't get hired as basic SWEs? Seriously?

They would definitely get a phone screen based on their resumes, but there is a good chance they wouldn't even make it to the virtual onsite round. It's not like the interviewers would use their products or look at their code or dissertation or whatever.

Re:Why are so many successful founding CEOs software engineers? by gamblor956 on Monday March 15, 2021 @12:42PM (#26468257)
Google famously refused to hire Max Howell, the programmer who wrote Homebrew, which (based on Google's own statements) was used by 90% of Google's engineers at the time of his interview, because he couldn't invert a binary tree in the specific (but unstated) manner that the interviewer wanted. So it's definitely possible, indeed likely, that Serge and Larry wouldn't get hired at the Google of today.

The "average Yale JD" would not get hired as a judicial clerk. Competition for clerkships is fierce, and generally only the top students get them. Any judge would probably take a "top" Yale JD, but unless the judge is a Yale graduate they'll all pass on the "average Yale JD," in favor of a better-performing graduate from another law school (usually their own).

Re:Why are so many successful founding CEOs software engineers? by EvilEy3 on Monday March 15, 2021 @06:45PM (#26470294)
You're forgetting less famous reply of Max Howell on quora: https://www.quora.com/Whats-the-logic-behind-Google-rejectin....
Re:Why are so many successful founding CEOs software engineers? by dmoy on Tuesday March 16, 2021 @12:52AM (#26473146)
Ok that makes more sense

> But ultimately, should Google have hired me? Yes, absolutely yes. I am often a dick, I am often difficult

If any of the interviewers got a whiff of that, it could have easily torpedoed the interview loop.

Re:Why are so many successful founding CEOs software engineers? by dmoy on Monday March 15, 2021 @01:27PM (#26468855)
I don't know about the rest of that, but

> Homebrew, which was used by 90% of Google's engineers at the time of his interview

This is definitely not true.

Re:Why are so many successful founding CEOs software engineers? by gamblor956 on Monday March 15, 2021 @01:32PM (#26468922)
I don't know how true the % is, but that is what Howell claimed and several Google employees verified that his software was used by significant parts of Google's engineering staff.

At any rate, the point is that a guy who used software used by a large portion of Google's engineering team because it was superior to the in-house solution could not get a job at Google because he failed to answer a programming question in the specific manner the interviewer wanted for a type of problem he would never actually encounter on the job. And in that vein, Sergie and Larry would similarly have difficulty getting hired at Google because other than their original algorithm, which Google has not used in over a decade, they have no modern or recent software experience and would likely fail all of the programming interviews.

Re:Why are so many successful founding CEOs software engineers? by dontreact on Monday March 15, 2021 @07:13PM (#26470564)
People at Google use blaze. I've never heard of anyone using homebrew. I think number is quite near 0%.

It's hard to put everything in a build system like blaze but if you do, I think the outcome is superior to Homebrew.

Re:Why are so many successful founding CEOs software engineers? by gamblor956 on Tuesday March 16, 2021 @02:40AM (#26473701)
I have never worked at Google, but around 2015 everyone I knew working there was using Homebrew if they used Mac for development. Moreover, there were quite a bit of HN and Reddit discussion about this incident at the time, and a number of Google engineers confirmed that Homebrew was in widespread use among the Mac-based developers.
Re:Why are so many successful founding CEOs software engineers? by yongjik on Tuesday March 16, 2021 @01:03AM (#26473204)
I have no idea how great a developer Howell is, but it's simply not true that Homebrew was used by many Google employees. I was at Google at that time (2015), had a macbook for several years, and had never even heard of Homebrew.

Google is a linux shop, and you were generally not allowed to even keep the source code in your notebook.

Re:Why are so many successful founding CEOs software engineers? by top_kekeroni_m8 on Friday March 26, 2021 @07:27AM (#26590794)
Where would one keep the source code then - if not locally?
Re:Why are so many successful founding CEOs software engineers? by yongjik on Tuesday March 30, 2021 @12:56PM (#26637095)
Either in a desktop sitting securely under your desk at office, or "in the cloud". You would remotely connect to them to do your development. (Most of Google binaries I saw were way too heavy to run on a Macbook, anyway.) Macbooks were just for checking email, calendar, or similar stuff.
Re:Why are so many successful founding CEOs software engineers? by EvilEy3 on Monday March 15, 2021 @06:48PM (#26470323)
> At any rate, the point is that a guy who used software used by a large portion of Google's engineering team because it was superior to the in-house solution

Do you seriously believe that they couldn't come up with something better than mediocre package manager?

Re:Why are so many successful founding CEOs software engineers? by gamblor956 on Tuesday March 16, 2021 @02:38AM (#26473692)
Based on Google's track record the past few years, Yes, I seriously believe that Google could not come up with a better package manager. They've taken 6 shots at a basic messaging application and they still haven't gotten that right. 4 attempts at a payment application. Stadia. Wear. Nest (post-acquistion). The had 1 shot with Stadia to do it right and they fucked it up so badly that it's impacting Google's ability to sell other services to prospective business partners because prospective clients rightly doubt Google's ability to launch and maintain a product.

The real question is: knowing Google's track record of almost complete failure for the past few years, why would you believe in Google?

Re:Why are so many successful founding CEOs software engineers? by EvilEy3 on Tuesday March 16, 2021 @04:26AM (#26474210)
And again, do you seriously believe that any of this has to do with engineering and not lack of business vision?
Re:Why are so many successful founding CEOs software engineers? by gamblor956 on Tuesday March 16, 2021 @01:59PM (#26480461)
Based on the bugginess of Maps, Duo, Hangouts, Wear, Stadia, and other products, I would say that the poor engineering is almost as much a factor of these failures as the lack of business vision. After all, the product doesn't need to work well for the PM to get promoted. It just needs to exist.

Google is run by the engineers. You don't get to blame the MBAs for its failures.

Re:Why are so many successful founding CEOs software engineers? by EvilEy3 on Wednesday March 17, 2021 @05:43AM (#26488697)
> Based on the bugginess of Maps, Duo, Hangouts, Wear, Stadia, and other products

What are your sources?

Re:Why are so many successful founding CEOs software engineers? by UncleMeat on Tuesday March 16, 2021 @08:38AM (#26475895)
All code at google is built from source from a single mono repo with a one version rule. Approximately zero googlers use homebrew since almost no development is done on macs and there is no need for packages management.
Re:Why are so many successful founding CEOs software engineers? by UncleMeat on Tuesday March 16, 2021 @08:35AM (#26475871)
He wasn’t asked to invert a binary tree. This was an exaggeration in his pissed off post.

His post also makes him sound like a dick (which he admits). Google has a “no jerks” policy that a lot of people take seriously.

Re:Why are so many successful founding CEOs software engineers? by danielmarkbruce on Monday March 15, 2021 @10:10PM (#26472068)
I literally mean there is a good chance they'd fail. Is it 30%? 60%? I'm not sure, but it's not as low as you might expect.

Many stanford phds fail the interview process. I'm not speculating. Others have suggested this says more about the interview process than the person in question. They might be right. But here we are.

Re:Why are so many successful founding CEOs software engineers? by codegladiator on Monday March 15, 2021 @07:30AM (#26464660)
You are assuming a lot. Many stanford phd's /dont/ fail the google interview. I'd guess larry, sergey and zuckerberg had a pretty good chance of /passing/ their own swe interviews...
Re:Why are so many successful founding CEOs software engineers? by danielmarkbruce on Monday March 15, 2021 @10:17PM (#26472111)
You might be semi joking, so apologies if I took it too literally: I'm assuming nothing really. And we are saying almost the exact same thing. Many pass, many fail. Pretty good chance of succeeding, pretty good chance of failing.
Re:Why are so many successful founding CEOs software engineers? by dcolkitt on Monday March 15, 2021 @08:21AM (#26465117)
The dirty truth is that most whiteboard industries are heavily loaded on raw cognitive ability. Sure, it’s ostensibly about data structures, but what it’s really about is fluid intelligence. Gates, Zuckerberg, Larry, Sergey and Bezos all have extremely high intelligence, and would most likely pass with ease.
Re:Why are so many successful founding CEOs software engineers? by cutemonster on Tuesday March 16, 2021 @03:22AM (#26473889)
I agree with you, and I think that this "dirty turth" is unpopular, because lots of people want to feel bright and intelligent, but the algorithm interviews, when interpreted in this way, tells them they're not that super bright -- and they don't like that, so they want to interpret the interviews in other ways, eg it's just luck, or anyone can do it with enough practice or things like that.

At the same time, I think the coding interviews generally are harder than what's needed to do the job well, just because there're so many job applicants so the bar gets unnecessarily high? And people who fail the interviews can still be really bright. (Also, some people get nervous and fail mostly related to that. I wonder how to avoid that happening)