The first phone interview was short and very easy, covering basic questions about data types, complexity, and concurrency.

The second phone interview did not happen. The interviewer became sick and did not warn the recruiter. After struggling to reschedule for about a week, they decided to skip that phase and proceed directly to an on-site interview.

On-site interviews consisted of five rounds, each 45 minutes long. Most interviewers presented one large problem and had me polish the solution until time ran out. I did not really get a chance to ask many questions about the company; I asked only two, and the answers did not particularly amuse me.

I don't recall the most difficult problem, but two of the largest ones were: write the `Game of Life' algorithm (in Java, not pseudocode!) and write a procedure that draws a line in a bitmapped array (again, in a real programming language). These had to be done on a whiteboard. (As a side note, while I was writing, interviewers were copying my solutions into their notebooks by hand).

All problems throughout my interview included questions about complexity, and some included questions about optimization and testing.

I got a feeling that the work is technically challenging, but the interview process seems quite ridiculous, especially writing substantially large programs on a whiteboard. Most interviewers' attitudes could be described as 'quite arrogant.' I did not receive any background information on the company or its nature of work throughout the interview process and did not feel frustrated when they did not proceed with an offer.

P.S. One tiny upside: their recruiters are the best – prompt, good at personal communication, and very organized.

I don't remember the most difficult question. It was something along the lines of computational complexity, but I had two really long problems (see review).