Goolge

Hey everyone. I was reached out by a Recruiter in early December for an L4 role. All interviews (1 phone screen and 3 coding and 1 behavioural) happened. The feedback was: Phone screen: hire for L4, strong hire for L3. He said if code was modular, it would have been SH. Round 1: Hire Round 2:, No Hire Round 3: Kinda mixed. Lean hire for L4 but debugging, coding etc were very good. He asked a warm up & the main problem. But in feedback, he said he had one more problem to ask and hence gave lean L4. Behavioural: recruiter said it's positive and interviewer gave good feedback. Extra Coding round: I asked recruiter to have one more round to compensate No Hire round. She said it's positive(didn't mention it was hire/lean hire). Due to No Hire round, had a few team matching before going to hiring committee. 2 HMs showed interest(after team match call), out of which 1 position got closed. The other HM approved and the packet went to hiring committee. The hiring committee gave Hire for L3 but No hire for L4. The no hire interviewer fuc**d me. Background: He asked a simple range max problem on array. To which I gave segment tree solution. Now during explanation he asked me to prove why search is logN, which I explained intuitively(like we divide the array in half each time and store answer, max height of tree will be logN). He said if during search query(l, r) you are going max(query(l, mid), query(mid+1, r)), here you are going both side of tree so how come it will be logN. I said it will go left/right some constant number of times and eventually some range will satisfy and it won't go further. but then he said "I understand what you are saying, but your answer is not conclusive and you need to prove mathematically". Which I tried and couldn't do. Then during implementation it took me 4-5 minutes to write build function (last time I implemented it was in 2019 :( ) and missed the base condition, he pointed it out and I fixed it. Solution was completed. He said looks good. But in feedback this guy wrote very bad feedback like: 1. Gave solution but couldn't explain complexity. Fine 2. He exaggerated the base condition miss in feedback : "implemented a solution which would run infinitely and candidate fixed it only after explicitly pointing out...". Even though during interview he simply asked me, when will this function stop and I quickly realised, explained and fixed it. I know it's my fault as well for 2nd round that I was slow but I really hate the feedback given by the interviewer. It's very tough to prove some things like greedy solutions, algo's like randomized quick sort will be NlogN etc. Idk why he judged purely based on one simple thing. It just frustrates me, I feel no amount of preparation could have saved me from that "prove mathematically" question he asked. Due to which the HC feedback says that the "candidate took more time during implementation and hence not going with L4, but L3. They did not consider the extra round saying 'coming up with solution was slow for 2nd round and additional round cann't compensate that'" like what bro. It depends on problem as well. How can you judge the problem solving based on 1 thing. I have around \~2.5 years of experience at a mid size product startup as SDE2. My Current base is above 25, no stocks. is it worth joining as L3? India. Wasted a lot of my time, the process started in Jan and it's april :( I am looking for a change rn, have applied at several places but mostly get Thank you:( Looking for suggestions, what I should do. I am mostly looking for Backend work, no specific tech stack but I prefer strogly types languages. Remote work will also work for me. Leetcode: <a href="https://leetcode.com/overkiller_xd/.