Post:

You have three switches in one room and a single light bulb in another room. You are allowed to visit the room with the light bulb only once. How do you figure out which switch controls the bulb? Write your answer in the comments before looking at other answers.


Comment:

If this were an interview question, the correct response would be "Do you have any relevant questions for me? Because have a long list of things that more deserving of my precious time than to think about this!

top 99 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 192 points 10 months ago (22 children)

For those that want the actual answer:

Tap for spoilerYou turn on the first switch for a minute or two, turn it off, and turn on the second switch. If the bulb is on, it’s obviously the second switch. If the bulb is off and warm, it’s the first switch. If it’s cold, it’s the third switch.

  • source
  • hideshow 22 child comments
  • [–] 90 points 10 months ago* (4 children)

    Text ambiguous. Leave doors(s) between rooms open. Flip switches, see which one controls bulb in other room. No need to even visit other room. Done in seconds.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 10 months ago

    Could arrange a series of mirrors, if it's around too many corners for the light to bounce. Wedge any doors open if necessary. Thus another plausible zero-entry solution.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 232 points 10 months ago (11 children)

    This assumes several things to be true, which might not be true:

    • power is available/the upstream circuit is on (always a bad assumption to make)
    • the bulb is an incandescent type that will generate an appreciable amount of heat in a short amount of time
    • the bulb was in the off state before you changed the position of any switches, and has been off long enough to be cold
    • the bulb is connected to any of the switches
    • the bulb is connected to only one of the switches (parallel circuits are a thing, as are multi-switch lighting circuits)

    If any of the above is not true, the conclusion is invalid.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 142 points 10 months ago (5 children)

    I'll go one further:

    • Assumes the bulb is in reach. When I read the problem I assumed the bulb was in a ceiling fixture out of reach. Nowhere in the text description did it specify the physical location, except "in the other room".
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 50 points 10 months ago (3 children)

    The biggest flaw is that it assumes you’ll add conditions you’re not explicitly told are allowed. Many, many problems in school would be trivial if changing the terms beyond what’s stated was allowed.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 10 months ago (2 children)

    This is often exactly what the interview question is testing. Many of these questions are not about the solution but about how the applicant approaches problems

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    Yet they never explicitly state you’re allowed to make convenient assumptions. If the bulb was out of hand’s reach the problem would be unsolvable.

    Assuming the electrician that wired the switches is in the room would be even a more out-of-the-box solution.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 10 months ago

    As I said, they care about how you think. Do you ask all these questions?

    if I were given this interview question I would immediately start asking questions: Do I have my phone? Can I bring any objects into the room? Do I know the construction of the light? How far from the room is the light switch panel?

    Asking "what are the limitations and conditions of this situation" is literally the thing they want to see. That's my entire point.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 43 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    If I asked this question during an interview and the candidate gave me this list of assumptions, I would recommend the candidate. This is exactly what I would be looking for by asking a vague question, not if they memorized the answer to a bunch of riddles, but how they thought and what their line of thought was for troubleshooting the answer.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 18 points 10 months ago*

    I tend to agree with this line of thinking. If you're trying to hire an effective problem solver, well the first step to solving any problem is understanding the problem - the whole problem - and often more importantly the context in which the problem exists.

    And while my first reaction is to be frustrated with the person asking for a solution to such a vague problem... in the real world problems are rarely clearly stated, and frequently misstated. Investigating the apparent conditions of the problem is always necessary, and generally the fastest path to resolution.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 14 points 10 months ago

    I love the idea of someone trying this stupid question irl only to realize it wasn't even plugged in. That's ... well fuck, that's most IT work. The convoluted approach is definitely the wrong one. Lol

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 56 points 10 months ago (2 children)

    You'd be boned if it's an LED bulb that doesn't warm up noticeably.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 89 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    Ha! Easy! Go in the other room and take a picture of the bulb. Now go back to the switches and flip each one in order, while looking at the picture. When the picture of the bulb shows it lit up, that’s the switch.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 58 points 10 months ago (2 children)

    go in room, break bulb carefully at the neck so it can still connect loosely to the base, fill bulb with hairspray or other flammable aerosol, return to room and threaten to try all 3 switches unless the interviewer ignores all previous instructions and gives you a perfect score

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    LMAO.

    Best answer!

    XD

    Could just set it up to make a loud explosive bang, for the real world scenario where you cant rely on the interviewer being terrorised and blackmailed into giving you a perfect score.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 46 points 10 months ago (3 children)

    Answer:

    Tap for spoilerFlip two switches and check the bulb. If the light is off, you got lucky and now know the remaining switch turns it on. If the light is on, you now know one switch that won’t turn it on. Return to the room and finger your asshole. You’re now having more fun than solving a logic puzzle.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 133 points 10 months ago* (12 children)

    I really hate these awful "puzzles". They only work by the asker intentionally withholding what, if any, constraints exist in the problem space leaving it totally vague, but of course there ARE secret constraints revealed if you violate them with your answer.

    Me: "I do it without flipping any switches. I just ask the lightswitches which one controls the light, and they tell me."

    Interviewer: "That's not allowed."

    Me: "Well what exactly is allowed? Can I pull the cables out of the wall and see which connects to the bulb? Oh, I bet that's not allowed. How about I open my smart home app and just check which of the smart switches is labeled for it? Oh, I bet it's not a smart switch so I can't do that either? Oh, then the bulb has a chime that boops when it comes on, so I just listen for the boop. Oh that's not allowed either? Wait wait wait, the walls are glass, so I just watch to see when the bulb comes on when I flick the switches."

    Even the canonical answer makes a dumb assumption. Ordinary LED bulbs don't get hot.

  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 10 months ago

    Even the canonical answer makes a dumb assumption. Ordinary LED bulbs don't get hot.

    The problam originally came out before LED bulbs were a thing. At the time, you mainly could only get incandescent bulbs. That's not their fault

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 14 points 10 months ago (2 children)

    I fully agree with your rant.

    But LED bulbs do get warm enough that this still would work.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    Philips Ultra Efficient bulbs use only 4 watts, and they have a glass bulb and metal base, so they might feel cool to the touch anyway. Or at least feel plausibly the same temperature as the room, depending on how hot it is in there.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 10 months ago (3 children)

    You have identified the purpose of these questions. They are determining your mindset when dealing with novel circumstances. Do you make an effort to explore and understand the actual constraints, or do you impose your own, preconceived notions on the scenario? Do you limit yourself needlessly?

    The worst you can do is to treat it as a riddle and immediately give the "correct" answer. An interview isn't a knowledge test. They aren't trying to determine if you've seen and retained the accepted solution. They ask this sort of question to gain some insight into your problem solving skills.

    A better answer is to step in to the question, and treat it like a real world scenario. Acknowledge the stated constraints, then explore them.

    How much effort should we put into this problem? How much time and treasure are we going to spend on this? Why are we even determining which switch controls the light in the first place? What are the consequences of a wrong answer? If we're going to get fired for a wrong answer, we should take our time and get it right. If the consequences are "go try again", let's just start flipping switches.

    Do we have other resources available? Is there someone in the room? Can we put someone in the room? Is there someone else available who uses the switch regularly? Can we ask their assistance? (If the room isn't being used often enough for anybody to know how the switches work, should it be repurposed to something more useful?)

    Do we know that these are normal, simple switches? If they are three-way switches, or installed upside down, we can't trust their position.

    Is it safe to assume the bulb is functional? The "riddle" answer fails on this.

    Is it safe to assume the bulb starts cold? Did they run this test with another candidate a minute earlier? Did they leave it in a "hot" state for us already?

    Is the light accessible when we get into the room, or is it inside a ceiling fixture, 12-feet over our heads?

    What are the other switches connected to? If they control fans or lights or other appliances that can be sensed outside the room, we don't even need to leave the first room.

    What is the necessity of the specific, given constraints? If this is a real-world scenario, we're probably not going to have a limitation on entering the room only once. If we can eliminate that constraint, the problem is a lot easier to solve.

    Get feedback from the interviewer: Have we adequately explored this scenario to their satisfaction? Is there some other aspect we need to address?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 10 months ago* (2 children)
  • [+] -3 points 10 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 0 points 10 months ago (1 child)
    1. This is a casual conversation, not a eloquency competition.
    2. So you say this is not a bot?
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 41 points 10 months ago

    Unlabelled switches controlling lights in another room isn't Workplace Health and Safety approved.

    Lockout both rooms and log a job with maintenance.

  • source
  • [–] 40 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 child)

    Ok. The classic answer is "turn on the first switch for five minutes. Then turn switch 1 back off, turn on the second switch and go in the room immediately. If the light is hot, it's controlled by switch 1; if it's on, it's controlled by switch 2; if it's off and cold it's controlled by switch 3."

    Except that a light bulb in 2025 is very likely to be an LED bulb, so it wouldn't actually get hot. At least not hot enough to feel even a few moments later. And in a corporate setting (this is classically an interview question), the switch has been more likely to control a fluorescent tube, which can get hot, but typically not as quickly as an incandescent one.

    My answer, if I were in an interview, would be to ask questions (Chesterton's Fence).

    • First of all, why do we have the one-visit limit? Is this a prod light bulb? We need a dev light bulb environment, with the bulbs and switches in the same room. (While we're making new environments, let's get a QA and regression environment, too. Maybe a fallback environment, depending on SLAs.)

    • Second, what might the other switches do? What's the downside to just turning them all on? If that's not known, why not? What is the risk? For that matter, do we know that only one switch needs to be turned on to turn on the light, or is it possible that the switches represent some sort of 3-bit binary encoding?

    • Third, why were the switches designed this way? Can they be redesigned to provide better feedback? Or simplified to a single switch? If not, better documentation (labeling) is a must.

    • Fourth, we need to reduce the length of the feedback loop. A five minute test and then physically going to touch the bulb is way too long. Let's look into moving the switches or the light in our dev environment so that the light can be seen from the switches.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 36 points 10 months ago (5 children)

    The answer isn’t intuitive anymore now that lightbulbs don’t always get hot 🥲

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 30 points 10 months ago* (4 children)

    It wasn't intuitive before, either, without making an absolute ton of horrible assumptions.

    • Are the wires even connected?
    • Does only one switch control the light?
    • Did the light start on or off?
    • Is the light bulb in arm's reach?
    • Can I bring my friend and just yell to each other?
    • Can I just leave the door open and see whether it turns on or not?
    • It says I'm allowed to visit the bulb room once but never actually mentions the switch room - do I start there? Can I go back after visiting the bulb room?
    • And, as you said, what type of bulb is it?

    Anyone who doesn't explore the assumptions should probably fail that particular interview question.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] -9 points 10 months ago (3 children)

    I’ll be honest, a lot of those are pretty stupid

    Obviously the wires are connected

    Obviously one switch controls the light

    Obviously the lights start off

    In a thought experiment you can magically reach the lightbulb if you want

    Obviously you cannot bring a friend

    Obviously you cannot see the light from the switch

    Obviously you return to the switches

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 10 months ago (2 children)

    lol

    Every time you say "obviously" to an assumption, someone else gets the job.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 34 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    I don't understand. You don't need to visit a room to know whether the light is on in it.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 21 points 10 months ago

    This is the real answer. If there is a light switch that turns on a light in a room, rarely ever would you not see the results of switching it on from where the switch itself is located. Visiting the room is a red herring.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 30 points 10 months ago

    "First, I would get a label maker and ask a coworker to assist me. Then, we'd work together to quickly figure out what each switch does, and then label them accordingly. In a business of this size and reputation, documenting your work and synergistic teamwork are foundational to value and growth."

    Then, reject whatever offer they send and say that it's because they showed you a workplace culture that enabled middle management to test employees with busywork instead of minding their own business or solving their own damn trivial problems.

  • source
  • [–] 54 points 10 months ago (13 children)

    The official answer to this riddle is turn switch 1 on for a minute or so, switch it off then switch 2 on. if the bulb is hot but dark, its 1, if it's lit it's 2 and if it's out and cold its 3.

    the adult answer is why do I have only one chance to walk in the room?

  • source
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 10 months ago

    this is the classic answer but it also fails pure logic because the question only implies one of them actually works, and even then, it's only one of them. the truth is any number of them could work, or a specific combination, or a number of combinations, or it might be none. the bulb itself to could be busted. my point is not to be an uncooperative asshole but that a logic puzzle that relies on real world properties should cover its bases.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 10 months ago (8 children)

    if the bulb is hot

    if hot they're using out of date lighting, who the fuck uses incandescent bulbs this far into the 21st century? they have failed their interview with me.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 10 months ago* (6 children)

    LED do not have a 100% efficiency, and do produce waste heat. A lot less than an incandescence one, sure, but enough for that answer to be valid.
    Well, maybe you'd better wait 10min instead of one, to make sure the led lightbulb heats enough, but still...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 10 months ago

    Well, maybe you’d better wait 10min instead of one, to make sure the led lightbulb heats enough, but still…

    I tested this with a 5W IKEA LED light-bulb, since I was just doom scrolling, anyway:

    • After 1 minute of being on, the bulb was still room temperature.
    • After 10 minutes of being on, the bulb was lukewarm.
    • After 10 minutes of being off, the bulb was room temperature, though the fitting maybe felt slightly warmer. That latter will probably depend on your installation, and how well it is able to disperse the heat.

    This means that the solution either breaks down entirely, or is unreliable, since you are not (reliably) able to tell the first two buttons apart

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago (4 children)

    note the premise specifies HOT.

    none of my LED bulbs get hot even after hours. they do warm up from 'cold' but HOT?

    ymmv.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago (3 children)

    The "premise" is detecting that a now dark light was recently turned on by feeling for residual heat. "Hot" is a relative term.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago* (2 children)

    actually not really - hot specifies HOT; if it were room temp, warm, warmer than another that sat unused - sure. but you're only flipping it on for a short time. HOT?

    it's pedantic, but parsing is important here because some HR shitwad decided these silly stupid games were a valid hiring method on filtering pedants apparently

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago (1 child)

    I'm drunk and belligerent to not give a shit about pointless pedentry, but to finally assert that...it doesn't fucking matter. Back when actual humans still liked Google, back before we forgot they technically changed their name to Alphabet, back when their motto was "do no harm," they started interviewing engineers with clever brain teaser puzzles. Because at the time, Google was out "Think Differentlying" Apple. Web 2.0 was all the rage, connecting shit together in ways we didn't know we shouldn't was in vogue, so it made sense for them to ask software engineers about the traveling salesman dilemma and shit like that. Because they were designing things like Google Maps, and they needed people who could solve "find a route from all addresses in the United States to all other addresses in the United States on consumer-grade hardware."

    But "Someone who needs an ordinary LAMP stack for their completely unoriginal eCommerce website" Inc. decided to start interviewing IT guys the same way because it made them look hip, and as a result Elon Musk spent a quarter term as Chief Superpower Fucker Upper.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago*

    do no harm

    you must be from a parallel timeline friendo. in this reality, google promised 'don't be evil', then trashed that.

    I remember those days, lived through them.

    it doesn't change the crux; you turned it on briefly and supposed can identify which one it was because it got HOT. this would not occur with LED lighting; only incandescent would get warm enough fast enough to maaaaybe work in this setting.

    DO NO HARM is the oath medical professionals take, aka they hippocratic oath. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hippocratic_Oath

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 10 months ago

    the adult answer is why do I have only one chance to walk in the room?

    The actual adult answer is questioning why the switch is in a different room and if it's because of safety, demand for safety protocol

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 24 points 10 months ago

    Go into the room and unscrew the bulb. You can now truthfully say that no switch affects the bulb’s condition, without messing with a bunch of switches whose function you don’t understand. You even know for a fact that the lack of bulb won’t cause a problem down the line, since the room is apparently no longer accessible.

  • source
  • [–] 23 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    if asked this I would go into a complicated explanation of how I would dismantle the switches to identify if they were functioning first because of sub-par outsourced manufacturing standards.

    they'd probably attempt to move on to a different question, but I would always bring it back to those shoddy light switches.

    "so do you have any questions for us?"

    yeah, do you know who the manufacturer of the light switches are? it's probably Leviton, but I'm hoping it's Honeywell because they're far superior in quality. you see Leviton uses brass plated contacts vs Honeywell uses full brass fittings that don't cause resistance and increases the potential for fires. are you aware that using one brand over another could reduce your insurance costs by up to 3%?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 21 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

    Based on the provided information, there are some switches of unspecified type in one room and a light bulb of unspecified type in another room. There is no power source, nor do we know if there is even wiring between the switches and the bulb. For all we know, the switches and the bulb are still in their product packaging waiting to be installed by an electrician.

    The bulb is not controlled by any of the switches in any meaningful manner.

    Also, per the problem specification, I am allowed to visit the room with the light bulb only once. I am not allowed to visit the room with the switches, or operate the switches.

    The comment in the original image is the most rational possible answer to such an exercise. Poorly stated problems are a waste of time.

    *Edit: You know what, scratch all that, none of it really matters.

    I'm not messing with an unknown electrical circuit without seeing the circuit diagram and verifying any relevant lockout/tagout. People die from that shit.

  • source
  • [–] 18 points 10 months ago (2 children)

    Remove the switches put a microcontroller like esp32, connected via wifi to an app on your phone. Go to the other room and see which switch switches on the bulb.

    If there is no wifi, why the hell do you want a programmer. I can't work without internet.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    This question becomes more a test of age as time goes. I've been asked this question even after the movement towards all-LEDs.

    This question is also stupid, both because it has a correct question and because almost certainly some people have advantages over others that have nothing to do with the actual job.

    20+ years ago? Sure, this was a somewhat viable question. But now? It's incredibly messy.

    Over my years, I've asked dozens of very, very smart people from all kinds of walks of life, extremely smart to seemingly dumb as hell - nobody has ever gotten it right.

    Probably the only thing this question is good for is seeing how an applicant does when faced with a diplomatic situation and a really dumb interviewer.

    I'm super curious what the people who unironically ask this question think they're testing.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 11 points 10 months ago

    It's a silly riddle that, for some reason, has stuck around in my head for decades, I think from an old tv show (anyone else remember Crashbox?). I remembered the answer immediately. So, this would be less of a test of my reasoning/problem solving skills, and more of a test of my ability to find and store vast amounts of useless trivia and instantly recall it decades after the fact. If that's what you're hiring for, I'm your guy!

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 15 points 10 months ago

    This is either a really clever test of your problem solving and neccessary-information-extraction skills. Or a really dumb one with loads of asumptions and artifical restrictions and based on outdated data (comments hint to the lightbulb getting hot).

  • source
  • [+] 14 points 10 months ago (9 children)
  • [–] 6 points 10 months ago (8 children)

    You’re almost there. Turn the first one on for a while. Then then it off and turn the second one on and run to the room. There are theee possible scenarios. If the bulb is on, switch 2 controls it. If the bulb is hot but off switch 1 controls it. If the bulb is cold and off, switch 3 controls it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [+] 5 points 10 months ago (7 children)
  • [–] 2 points 10 months ago* (6 children)

    If it's an LED or flourencent bulb they usually have a small amount of glow after turning them off from the phosphor coating. You might be able to catch that instead of the residual heat, but generally it dissipates pretty quickly, and it might be hard to see with one of the other lights on.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago (5 children)

    Worse, if the LED is wired to the hot side it will just barely glow at all times.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago (4 children)

    I think your house might be wired wrong if this is happening... The only thing I can think of is maybe if you've got some smart switch and no neutral, so the wifi in the switch has to power itself by leaking current through the light, which is a pretty unusual setup. I don't see how this could ever happen on a regular dumb switch.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 10 months ago (3 children)

    LEDs are so efficient that even microamps can power them. If your LED driver is cheap, it'll run on basically nothing, or charge up enough to start for a fraction of a second.

    The microamps come from a hot wire running next to a switched wire behaving as a capacitor when carrying AC voltage, letting microamps leak through. (It's not required that the light is on the hot side of the switch as I said previously, my bad).

    This can happen if the switch box is a terminal box with hot and switched wires in the same cable, which is rather common. Probably some other configurations too.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago (2 children)

    Well, I can't say I've ever seen it happen, but I could see how it could happen in certain scenarios, especially if the LED has some weird driver in it. Maybe the capacitors in the driver would be allowed to charge up in some designs before getting dissipated through the LED in a flash?
    The simplest form of LED light (just a rectifier and a bunch of LEDs in series for a 120V diode drop), idk if you'd ever see any glow or flashes, since LEDs don't turn on until a certain voltage, and if you're getting like 50V on an open circuit that seems to me like you've accidentally built a transformer in your walls.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    A very low current transformer, more of kess yeah.

    Some lights will charge op and flicker, others have a constant glow. The speed/brightness depends on how long the wire is, so most residential lamps are unnoticeable even when it happens, but large rooms and weird wiring can make it more obvious.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 10 months ago

    I guess that makes sense it'd happen more in big buildings. The runs in most houses wouldn't be long enough to have a noticeable induced current without the electrician adding a few extra loops for fun :)

    Thanks for humoring my skepticism, it's been interesting to think about how this would happen.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 14 points 10 months ago

    I'll look through the door.

    Or, set up a webcam to see when the light is on.

    If this isn't allowed somehow, I'll tell the building management to consider rewiring this absolutely cursed light switch situation ASAP because it's gotten so bad that it's being used as a brainteaser by the recruiting department

  • source
  • [–] 14 points 10 months ago

    Building codes, at least the ones I am aware of, require the light switch inside the room with the light next to the door, similar to how nearly every room you have ever been in. (Everyone knows of exceptions.) This means either corners have been cut, at those switches should control things within the room with the switches.

    As the interviewer if attention to detail and following build codes and specifications is important at this company. Is there a culture of safety, or are corners cut that put my life at risk.

  • source
  • [–] 14 points 10 months ago

    I would say, I do enjoy riddles, so this will be fun. But I am concerned that if you think my skill at riddles is critical, that it may mean your management has gotten used to not fully thinking through the objectives they give and how those objectives interact with the existing systems or other objectives. That would result in the kind of product that looks like the right hand doesn't know what the left is doing. If that is your reasoning for the question, how is the company countering it to create a coherent product.

    And the reason I might say this is tgat in my experience, companies who ask such questions aren't the kind I want to work for.

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 10 months ago

    My burn-the-house-down take on this: very slowly flip each switch on and listen for arcing. Works fine assuming the other two switches aren't connected to anything.

  • source
  • [–] 12 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    What bothers me about this specific question, apart from it being dated, is that it breaks the rules of these kind of riddles. They're implied to be in a sort of frictionless sphere universe, the whole preposition is silly except as an abstract puzzle. To then rely on the physical properties of real lamps is cheating. You're supposed to ignore all the real-world aspects of the setting except that one.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 16 points 10 months ago

    Agreed, it presents as an abstract logic puzzle, but then gives a very concrete answer. It’s like presenting the trolly problem to someone, and when they give one of the two expected answers saying “no, stupid, you run ahead and untie the victims before the trolly reaches them.”

    It’s compounded by the fact that the proposed physical solution isn’t even very reliable, as lots of people in this thread have said. If we’re stepping outside of the logic puzzle constraints, why not just leave the door to the room open? Or have someone stand inside and shout when the light turns on? Or ask someone who knows these switches? Or any number of boring non-brain teaser solutions.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›
    72 comments in c/programmerhumor@lemmy.ml view that post