If I'm a FAANG, I'm simply not using my normal interview process to hire for the really interesting jobs. I reserve those ones for people who got the job by virtue of their publication history in the academic literature, or because they built some well-known cool thing, or because they got promoted into the position. Those people get shunted over into the "you didn't come to us, we came to you" interview process.
The seats I'm looking to fill with the more public interview process are mostly seats for the grunt coders who work under those people. My ideal candidate for that position isn't some rock star creative genius; it's a workaholic who is resistant to boredom. And what's something a workaholic who's resistant to boredom would be really good at? Grinding away on programming interview questions, of course.
Teach a bunch of people to think in a certain way, speak a certain language and respect authority. Someone who excels at the repetitive mundanity of business school will be a perfect junior marketing manager at BigCo.
It's basically taking the way the Army trains new recruits and applying it to white collar jobs.
'Business schools turn out well trained, amoral yet obedient clerks.'
Can likely say the same about most CS programs. I know you can say that about engineering.
What, like homebrew? :)
Context for everybody else: https://twitter.com/mxcl/status/608682016205344768?lang=en
TL;DR: author of Homebrew interviews at Google, but doesn't get hired because he couldn't/wouldn't invert a binary tree on a whiteboard.
I am not sure what to think about this claim: it is the other company that prevents you from working for them by this interview process. The current employer has the incentive that you don't leave. The other (potential) employer rather has the incentive to poach you.
I don't know if I can ever be one of those 'built cool things/get published' guys, so I guess that means I'm destined for grunt work. Fk.
