My Experience: Failed Google interview

Need onion googlers, Recently gave interviews for L3 Got 2 hires in on-site, third on-site review is pending (would be lean hire most probably) Googlyness is still remaining. Is there any chance for clearing HC based on this? Total Ex- 1.5 years

3 years in Google 16+ years of experience 8+ years of EM experience Google hiring committee member Ask me anything

I needed some help in coming up with a study plan to specifically train for Google's interview process. I currently have 4yoe, so I think the interviews will be for SDE2 role. There will be 3 DSA rounds, 1 Googleyness, and 1 Leadership round. I already have experience in DSA and have solved most of Neetcode 150 (except DP, Bit Manipulation, and some hard problems). If any of you have given Google (or any FAANG) interview before, I would love to get some guidance on how to prepare in 30 days. I already know most of the common algorithms like DFS, BFS, Sliding window, Binary search, etc so I won't have to start from scratch. Also, the recruiter mentioned that I will have only 45 mins to solve two questions: mostly 1 hard and 1 medium. So I basically have around 20 mins per problem, which I feel is very difficult to solve a Leetcode Hard problem unless you have seen it before. Did I misunderstand the recruiter? Are there any tips on how to get good at this?

Having Google coding interview scheduled tomorrow. I feel prepared. But just giving the right solution will not make a strong hire. I want to know from some experienced guys about what it takes to get a "strong hire" feedback from Google interviewer ? Share your valuable insights. @Biriyanienthu, don't ask another questions in the comment.

Hey folks, I got reached out by a recruiter from Google reg an open position I just wanted to know what would the ideal prep strategy look like. I like to think I'm below average in leetcode. I can solve a lc mediums maybe under 30 mins. But lc hard is a different ball game for me. How long should I request for in terms of a preparation time. And it'd help what all concepts should be focussed. Btw - 4.5 yoe, fullstack engineer - i guess the profile is for sde 2

A woman from my company, SDE 1, laid off after going through PIP, secured a job at Google. On the contrary, one of my friends who recently interviewed with Google got grilled with leet code hard questions. Can anyone shed some light on the level of difficulty of the Google diversity hiring interviews.

Indian SDEs on LinkedIn & Twitter are some of the worst engineers you will ever find across the real world. Their typical value lies around: - Cracking a FAANG/MAANG or Product company. - Make an announcement on LinkedIn & Twitter and accumulating followers. - Starting YouTube channel, Topmate links, affiliate marketing channels, and more. - Rant DSA, System Design, Interview resources all day long. - Post daily of their office, their colleagues, candid shots, and barely getting any work done. While this is expected out of early career professionals, it pains to see senior SDEs doing the same shit over and over again. Things don't end here — Everyone talks about creating a revolution. And the revolution is teaching DSA. If you are an experienced SDE and still ranting DSA, it just means that you have barely learnt anything that is of worth any value. You are atmost a "Ticket Engineer". You get assigned a Jira ticket, you bust your ass solving it, and that's it. That's your entire value. Its high time that these "Bhaiya", "Didis", "Bhabhis" stop ranting DSA and System Design over and over, and build something of real value. You would barely see any credible open-source projects coming out of India (but hey, we have some many contributors!), barely any Indie dev project, or anything that captures the attention of the world. Literally every popular SDE you might follow or see over your social media is the same. Their entire community game is a farce and designed to capture gullible college students and shill thousands of rupees out of them. You might be featured on Times Square ($40 ka showoff), but no one would remember you for anything that you built. <Rant Over. Peace>

Talking to my nephew nowadays seems like the AI bug has gotten to him. Even going back during the early parts of my own career and even undergrad, ML and stats was still a fledgling field. Most of the smart folks went into SDE roles at top tech. I still remember that even back then, hiring for roles like these were extremely theoretical. You would test even experienced candidates with undergrad topics which was slightly outdated tbh because most of the functions were abstracted away and it is obvious that you would not remember the matrix approach to finding weights for a simple linear regression model. Has this changed now? Because I don't think interviews like that actually evaluate the accumulated wisdom that experienced professionals bring to the table. I mean it is generally a waste of time for anyone to brush up manual derivations or remember SQL niche intricacies. Usually it is better to test for the 80% knowledge that is actually useful on a day to day basis. I mean if the main things that companies test in experienced candidates is something that can be rote-memorized from a book then they are not testing the right things no? What do you all think? Just wondering about this for some time now especially considering the hype around AI?

I reflected back on my L4 Google interviews. Although I made minor mistakes and rectified by myself without additional hints from interviewer, they were looked upon as incapability. I wasn’t even considered for L3, though I solved all the questions with minimal hints with correct DS. Follow ups I was able to solve and discuss the right approach too. Is this fair ?