eBay Interview Questions
& Process

So the interview was basically a technical debugging round. They gave me this Android project, it had a bunch of bugs, and I had to find and fix them. It was pretty time-bound, so I really had to dive into the code, figure out how things connected, and then squash the bugs. They were checking how I approach problems, how I navigate code, and my general debugging skills. It felt like a good test of real-world Android development, especially dealing with state and fixing issues.

So I went through six interviews, with five in the final round. I'll mainly talk about the DSA, Coding & Testing, and UI parts. The whole thing was tough technically, but it felt kinda messy and unprepared sometimes. In those three rounds, they spent like 20-30 mins on my resume before jumping into hard coding problems. This really cut down on coding time, making already tricky stuff feel way too rushed. Honestly, I expected more actual coding based on the round names. It would've been great if the recruiter or interviewers were more upfront. Also, there were a bunch of tech hiccups: 1. My Java code first went into a JS console. Mistakes happen. 2. It wouldn't compile in Java because of a class/file name issue (App.java), and the file name was stuck in the environment. 3. I couldn't make new classes because it was a single file, so I had to tweak my code just to make it run. For the DSA round, they wanted an 'LRU Cache' in Java (even though I like Python) with O(1) time, no method signatures, no return specs. The interviewer just assumed I knew it! The problem is fine for a senior, but they didn't explain it well, so I had to ask a ton of questions before coding. And this interviewer wasted time asking extra questions while I was coding super fast. I barely had time to test anything! Another time, 'container with most water' was presented as 'antenna signal' without a clear formula, inputs, or output. I had to ask for examples and clarification. In a separate coding round, I had to write JUnit/Mockito tests from memory in that same single-file setup, without a test framework, after fixing a class name that was hardcoded. The UI round involved doing infinite scroll in any framework I wanted, under pressure, then adding more features because, surprise, more resume talk. Isn't resume discussion supposed to be in its own round? The difficulty was spot on for a senior role. But, the unclear problem descriptions, environment issues, and short coding times made it feel more chaotic than organized. The interviewers were mostly nice, and the problems were relevant, but the process needs clearer instructions and better-prepared setups. If this is how they work, yikes.

I went through several interview stages for a research position and was invited for onsite interviews. I had already booked my train tickets and accommodation for the in-person round. However, just before the interview, I was told the role was on hold and the interview was canceled. It would have been better if they had mentioned the possibility of the role being paused earlier, or confirmed its stability before inviting candidates onsite. The technical interview conversations before this were good and professional, and I liked the interviewers' time. I hope the process becomes more predictable and clear for future candidates.

So this was for SWE-III at TCGPlayer. The final interview was super misaligned with what they told me earlier. The whole loop had three parts: first, a recruiter screen, then the hiring manager screen, and finally the technical screen. The recruiter mentioned they were modernizing the team and needed someone who knew system migrations, Kafka, SQS, SNS, and event-driven pub-sub. They asked about my experience with streams, topics, and message processing. The hiring manager call was all behavioral. He basically repeated what the recruiter said and mentioned the next round would be about C# and debugging. I was expecting a C# debugging technical interview after that. I scheduled the final interview with the recruiter, and they confirmed it would be in C#, but said I could switch if needed. Since I don't do C#, I spent a week practicing C# drills and debugging exercises. The recruiter also said the final round would be coding plus system design or architecture, and it would be 60 or 90 minutes, but they never clarified which, even when I asked. But the actual technical interview was nothing like that. They didn't ask anything in C#, didn't have me debug, and didn't talk about system design or architecture. Instead, it was one simple coding problem and then a bunch of old textbook questions, like what's a Singleton and what's Dependency Injection. It felt like a new grad interview from years ago. I had prepared to discuss dead letter queues, Kafka partitioning, and distributed systems, so these trivia questions felt totally off, and I felt unprepared because it wasn't relevant. They didn't ask about my resume or background at all. Nothing about migrations, Kafka, SQS, SNS, or distributed systems came up. The whole thing felt inconsistent and like a waste of prep time. The hiring manager had said SWE3 is like a senior role elsewhere, but the interview didn't feel senior at all.