That logic is not sound. If there's some selection criteria to select engineers from the general populace S, and a subset engineers who make it past S are average, that doesn't mea the end distribution of IQs (you're the one who brought up IQs) of FAANG engineers vs the distribution of IQs of the general SWE population would match in statistics. That is, large statistics don't just match because some subset of the populations match at some level. It's a clear misunderstanding of statistics and sloppy logic.It's pretty absurd that you continue to think you're somehow making a logical argument and somehow think your IQ is above 120.
adam_arthur|3 years ago
> "The minimum threshold to get hired for FAANG is ~average talent and the willingness to grind"
> "Some average talent people work for FAANG"
> Thus, somebody who is average can get hired by FAANG
I said absolutely nothing about the skill distribution or histogram of talent across all of FAANG engineering.
Anybody who's worked in the Bay Area has known a number of untalented people who have joined FAANG. That's reality. Believe whatever you want.
That an untalented person can join FAANG does not say anything about the talent of the FAANG engineer on average.
An interview process threshold defines the left tail of the skill distributions of the hires, and tells you nothing about the shape of the distribution beyond that. Though you can likely assume it's normally distributed.
How many ways do I need to slice it for you?
ablatt89|3 years ago
> Though engineering at FAANG in general is overrated. Know plenty of underperforming people at my company that ended up there. All you needed in the past is ~average IQ and willingness to grind >
You have to be specific here, what do you mean "all you need"? Is this time to study algorithms? Because not everyone who studies algorithms, at the same rate, the same number of problems get an offer after an interview. Not only that, you're implying the interviews for other companies are exactly the same in regards to checking for IQ, which is completely laughable.
You simply assert that someone with average IQ that you know (and even underperformers) made it into FAANG, so you then broadly extrapolate, without evidence, that it means the selection criteria S for FAANG is simply a matter of if the person spends time studying and has an average IQ, and is no different than any under interviews.
Astounding.
cscurmudgeon|3 years ago
Solid reasoning there.
> Anybody who's worked in the Bay Area has known a number of untalented people who have joined FAANG. That's reality. Believe whatever you want.
"Statistically and logically sound" lol
Nothing to see here works. Can't you see the obvious?
Edit: I too believe that FAANG engineers are not special but that belief is not proof of that statement.