What use is that? That is asking for rote memorization.

Why would you want to test that? That's pointless. At the very least if you ask about complexity of common algorithms, you should also ask them to explain how they determined it, or could determine it. Even better, ask them to create an algorithm to solve a problem, then ask them about the complexity of that. Then they have to actually work out the complexity, demonstrating that they understand asymptotic complexity as a concept, rather than just regurgitating. Then take it one step further and see if they understand the difference between asymptotic and real-world complexity, and why the ideal algorithm for massive data sets may not be at all appropriate for small ones.

My goal in an interview is to make the candidate think, and to watch how they do it. How do they explore the solution space? Do they tend to get stuck on one unproductive line of inquiry, or can they step back and try another angle? Can they see ways to reformulate the problem to simplify it? Generalize it? Specialize it? Do they understand the tradeoffs of various design decisions? How effectively do they collaborate with me on the solution? Good engineers know when to ask for help.

Oh, and... can they write code? Because it's amazing how many people walk in fully able to talk the talk but when asked to produce some functional, reasonably-clean code fall flat on their faces.

Those are useful things to ask about. Memories of libraries and interfaces? Useless. Actually, probably counterproductive unless what you really want is someone who is deeply specialized, then you can ask about the relevant components in that specialty. But in the common case it's far more important to find out if they can reason, problem-solve, code and interact with you. They can google the specifics.

Yes, this is why one of the requirements for good Google interview questions is that they not rely on specific knowledge. They tend to ask you to invent and implement a new algorithm, not remember an old one. Where interviewers do ask questions that require specific knowledge, they're happy to provide whatever you don't remember.

Nice theory, but as I understand it, higher percentages of candidates with professional experience are hired than of candidates fresh out of school. I'm 45 and was hired by Google four years ago. Most of my team was in the 40s, with several in their 50s and a few in their 60s.

There is an issue that older guys who haven't reviewed their algorithms, data structures, complexity, etc. recently may be a little rusty. Most of the time this doesn't actually create any issues, and it's pretty easy for older guys to address simply by brushing up before the interview. I did.

Actually, Google doesn't. The cafes are open late because people work all sorts of odd schedules. Some don't come in until noon and leave late, some show up early and take off at 3. In the Mountain View office there's a lot of both of those patterns, mainly because traffic sucks so bad that people try to schedule around it.

As for the games and stuff, that's just recognition that taking a break is good for think time. Massage services, espresso bars, etc., are all parts of that.

I've been a Google software engineer for four years and there has never been the slightest pressure on me to work long hours. Not only has no one ever asked me to, no one has hinted, implied or anything else, and on a few occasions when I chose to work late my old manager noticed and told me to go home. I'm not saying every manager is that way, in fact I don't think my current manager would ever say anything to me about my work schedule, whether I worked around the clock or hardly at all. Eventually my lack of productivity would provoke a response, though it would probably take a quarter or so.

Now, there are people who work a lot of hours at Google. Mostly young people who don't have anything better to do and are really excited about what they're building. And mostly no one tells them not to. But there are plenty of others who work normal hours, and no one says anything to them, either.

BTW, I'm 45.

Not at all. Why do you ask?

So you're suggesting that the pumps are adding enough energy to move millions of tons of earth and rock? Really?

That's nonsense. All they're doing is breaking loose enormous energies that were already there.

I always make it even simpler, by citing my Greedy Bastard Policy regardless of what anyone does.

vaccines have to be mandatory as freedom has nothing to do with prideful ignorance that is a threat to safety of and well being others

get it shitbag?

As much music as what? You have nothing to compare it to. You cannot say what the industry would have done if there was no copyright, so the volume of content we have today proves nothing. For we know, we might have twice the content if we had no law getting in the way of creating content. So, sorry, your claim is still worthless.

Pipe all that magma into the ocean, release vast amounts of steam that turns into precipitation to end droughts, easy. You're welcome, now get to work and make that happen.

When it does erupt again, the humans might be long gone. Or, maybe not.

The real question is, will humans still be here after it erupts....

I was around when St. Helen's blew up, and that was a relatively modest eruption. A super volcano could be extinction event if it is big enough.

'...for now, the only workaround is to simply not be in range of such a malicious network.' Really? How about not owning an iOS device?

wait, you're stalking my other posts? and you think heroin is like a vaccine?

of course any vaccine should be thoroughly tested before they inject it into anyone you raving moron

it's not like they are grabbing people and injecting them with experimental formulations. the science on this is well-established and there is a rigorous review process before anyone gets injected

you are a fearmongering, pridefully ignorant wackjob. you need to get and your kids your fucking vaccine and if you do not you ARE a health threat to us so we WILL save your kids and the rest of us from your dangerous ignorance, you irresponsible asshole

go live in the mountains and never have kids. if you won't do that, do what you have to do to be part of society you dumb fuck

We didn't have vaccines for most of our nations history and those diseases never posed more than a passing threat to our society.

go to an old graveyard

look at the old tombstones

look at the ages

you're a pridefully ignorant asshole and your stupidity is dangerous to the rest of us

But if you listen to the FAA... drones *could* kill people and therefore we must fine their operators huge sums (Raphael Pirker for example) and we must enact new regulations that says they can't be used by terrorist organisations such as Amazon.com or DHL without expensive and difficult to get permissions. What do you mean that's a different type of drone? You mean the ones that kill can be used by the US government with impunity against the evil and the innocent alike -- while the ones that don't kill are increasingly restricted and constrained by regulation?

Good work America! (NOT).