I was initially contacted by a recruiter. We arranged a first technical call via phone. The interview starts with general information about the company and position. Later you walk through your CV highlighting any achievements. Everything went pretty smooth at this stage. I seemed to have impressed the interviewer with some good optimizations in the past. There were generally two or three things that some will see as red flags that occured during the interview: 1) The interviewer was mentioning languages and implementation details when referring to giving a high level view of the infrastructure. 2) The interviewer was very pushy into forcing the coding solution as to his mind - instead of respecting the interviewee's approach. 3) The interviewer didn't seem to understand that O(n3), O(n2) and O(n1) are the same thing and insisted in providing the most optimized solution from the beginning. The wost part was the technical part. I was asked to solve a technical problem (in Python for the role I applied). The problem itself is not that hard but personally I got a bit mixed in the problem and then the interviewer made it harder for me instead of helping me with hints for the existing code. The interviewer asked me about what I had in mind and its complexity. I said O(n3) and the reason behind it. He mentioned there is a better way so I managed to think of a better way giving O(n2). He insisted on an O(n1) approach and I got a rough idea about the implementation he meant. The problem was that I still didn't manage to get the first approach to a workable solution and I was in some way forced to start again from the optimized solution. This just made it worse. After getting even more stuck, instead for the interviewer giving me some hints, he started micro-managing my approach which didn't actually affect the part where I got stuck at the first place. This totally broke my thinking (and even moral) since the implementation became something that the interviewer understood but was totally different from how I would do it. Needless to say, I didn't go further. I think the specific interviewer was quite narrow-minded and I hope he doesn't represent the average personal at Bloomberg.