Their recruiter sent me a message with a code challenge link to a platform called "HackerRank".
I was supposed to solve a "find contiguous sub-array" problem in 60 minutes. I make it pass in 7 test scenarios out of the 10 in less than 60 minutes, so I decided to just submit it as it is.
2 days later I received an automatic message from HackerRank saying that I didn't meet the requirements for the job. So I replied to the e-mail with the recruiter in copy and they didn't reply.
After one week, I sent another e-mail asking for feedback in order to understand what could be better.
I received a response like "All I receive from HackerRank is that you didn't get a high enough score to pass the test. Sorry mate, good luck on your job search!"
Are you guys really basing your recruitment process on "scores" of a 60-minute puzzle? That is so 80s... I thought at least I would have more serious feedback or another round of discussion so other aspects of my experiences got analyzed.
That hiring process is so broken, that if I already have had solved this very problem before, you wouldn't even notice and I would pass with a maximum score. That is pointless.
Questions d'entretien [1]
Question 1
Solve a pointless puzzle-ish algorithm in 60 minutes on HackerRank
The technical interview process felt poorly calibrated and inconsistently framed. The main issue was not that the questions were difficult, but that several rounds seemed to test a different skill set than what was communicated beforehand.
In practice, it often felt unclear what the primary evaluation criteria actually were. Some rounds started as if they were focused coding exercises, but the expected discussion appeared to extend into broader design, scaling, or product-style considerations without that scope being made explicit early on. That made it difficult to judge how much time to spend on core implementation versus higher-level tradeoff discussion. The result was a process that felt noisy rather than rigorous.
Round 1 - HR screening call - asking about experience and motivation
Round 2 - AI assisted programming (1h), System design (45m)
Round 3 - Language proficiency (45m), Technical review (45m), Culture and leadership (1h)
The engineers were very friendly. However, the feedback was that I wasn't hitting the seniority expectations.
AI assisted programming - the interviewer expected to see the final result, although I was very close to it, I was disqualified for that. Everything else was acknowledged with strong signals
System design - I was asked to design a rendering system where users download the rendered outcome. The interviewer spent about 5 mins talking about his this role, the other interviewer role, and asked about my experience.
The engineers do not consider your background, if you haven't worked with media files, and related resources like CDN, SAS tokens etc. or you never engaged with downloads, they expect you to know it, and provide your immediate design.
1st interview:
1. AI Assisted Programming
Implement a text rendering cli tool, user can define the text, color, font and etc, cli need to render it into PNG file and save it locally.
2. System Design
Design a design rendering system.
Questions d'entretien [1]
Question 1
If leadership pushes for a hard delivery this quarter, but you think system stability is already risky, how do you handle that conversation?