and apparently very few on HN in general, seeing how this piece was upvoted.

Google has been studying their process in the last few years and are reaching different conclusions than these guys.

Leave it to the reader to ascertain which group has more validity.

Begs the question, doesn't it?

>> Binary trees are MOST ASSUREDLY on that list

Sure they are... and my intro to CS textbook was ~500 pages. I'll bet I could find something to trip up just about anybody, especially when coupled with the pressure of doing it in front of the class ^H^H^H people that have $$$$/power over you.

He also would've nailed it had he been given 10 minutes to do some research to refresh.

Silicon valley (and the numerous companies that mock the interview style) are testing for the wrong thing when they hire, then complaining about not being able to find good engineers.

Having your factory retool weeks before you launch an unproven product because you don't like the glass? Not very pragmatic.

That's not the Steve Jobs I read about. Like him or not, he was a man of principle.

We want someone who has less than 12 years of MANAGEMENT EXPERIENCE. The reason is that if you haven't been coding for 12+ years...you probably are not "hands-on" enough

This arbitrary cutoff makes absolutely no sense. I'd like to see your quantification of skill drop off per year of management.

If what you are wanting is a hands-on technical manager, then you need to say so.

And it shouldn't matter if the person has been hands on for 5 years or 20.

But I feel I'm being a little too generous regarding your motives here.

And yes, it's blatantly ageist... It falls under the disparate impact provision:

"In addition to prohibiting intentional discrimination against older workers (known as “disparate treatment”), the ADEA prohibits practices that, although facially neutral with regard to age, have the effect of harming older workers more than younger workers (known as “disparate impact”), unless the employer can show that the practice is based on an RFOA."