↳

Yes, I received an offer.

↳

and when did they give you the offer?

↳

yes sure

↳

Yes

↳

• Break the balls into the following groups: (1, 2, 3), (4, 5, 6), (7, 8) • Step 1. Weigh (1, 2, 3) against (4, 5, 6) Two possible outcomes: The two groups are equally heavy. (Case A) One of these groups is heavier than the other. (Case B) • Case A >> Weigh 7 against 8. Now you have identified the heavier ball in 2 weighing. • Case B >> Take the heavier group (assume it to be (1, 2, 3)), take any two balls and weigh them against each other. Either one of these is heavier else the third ball is. Less

↳

The above answers is for 8 balls.

↳

I answered it to the best of my abilities and then the "interviewer" asked me to create a hotmail account as if this is something highly technical... Yes you heard right, the interviewer "Tested my technical abilities" by having me create a free hotmail account that anyones grandmother can do.... Less

↳

We thank you for your feedback. We are regularly reviewing our application process and looking for improvements. In response to your comment about creating a hotmail account, the purpose of that question was NOT to test your technical skills at all. I can't get into the purpose of the question, but we were looking for something else there. Less

↳

Nope.

↳

The questions were mostly ok but the most senior person on the call who was based in the US was very difficult which is fine I thought, they want to test to see how you'd deal with difficult customers I suppose but he was downright rude at times and didn't like it it when I pushed back a bit. At one point he said you seem to have a 2 year itch because you leave jobs every 2 years. Even though I was in the job before last for 5 years (!) Ofcourse I pointed this out. He questioned why I didn't answer one of the video questions but I explained I didn't want to waffle if I didn't actually know the answer. I mea n you've decided to bring me in anyway so whats the big problem. The process took far too long, the HR screener I get, the video interview I had to make more time for and I feel was a waste of time as was talking to 6 different people all afternoon. They also cancelled my first face to face after I spent an hour getting to the city but I can forgive this as emergencies happen and they had systems down. What I can't forgive is that I did my research on the company, I answered their questions and I made the time for all the interviews and when they rejected me, the HR lady who was very friendly and seemed keen for me to come in and explained how they really wanted to see me, gave me a generic rejection email and no response at all when I asked for feedback. Now I can guess I was probably not technical on the role and they decided not take a chance but after I spent all my time, give the courtesy of an honest constructive feedback rather then a canned response. Less

↳

You dodged a bullet mate, this company sucks.

↳

Found the exact same experience from this company myself even if an offer was made i was going to turn the position down as i got a very strange vibe. The technical interview wasn't like id expect as no technical questions were asked and i didn't find the guy very knowledgeable when i quizzed him. Less

↳

Relating to experience is key to get the conversation rolling. "As technical support I often have questions regarding security; [follow up with selling yourself on firewalls/acl/Methodology]". Less

↳

I was later told in the interview feed back that I was "arrogant" for asking those questions.. Wow!! Seems like it would have been better not doing the research.. that's a first, and when I thought about what the recruiter said, .. well what can I say. The code words he used were for guys. Less

↳

(I mean you would put one resistor in series with each of the three switches, obviously; the greatest value resistor would result in the most dimming). Less

↳

Assumptions: You have three inputs: X, Y, Z with two possible states (0,1). You have three outputs: A,B,C with two possible states (0,1). The inputs and outputs are independent of each other, but one input should be matched to one output. For example, if X --> A, then X(1) --> A(1). Note: we don't actually know whether the normal state of the switch is open or closed. For our purposes 0 is normal state, 1 is abnormal state. You have one chance to observe the outputs. You could flip one of the switches and observe, but this will only tell you about one of the connections and leave two unknowns. You could flip two switches, but this still leaves two unknowns. You could flip all three, but this leaves three unknowns. You could flip none of them, but that leaves three unknowns. Another possibility is to McGyver the light switches by placing three resistors of different values in series with the switch, verifying the switch is closed, and then observe the relative brightnesses of the bulbs. More creatively, you could use your one trip to leave the room to find the documentation and/or the persons responsible for this cruel experiment. I am sure this is wrong, but I was never a math or CS major. =D Less

↳

Remember 169 is not route able and 127 is loopback