Initial coding challenge that you work through with one of the engineers. That part was actually very fun and enjoyable. The onsite "Superday" as they call it was quite interesting. The first session was a pretty simple coding question. The second session was an overview of a product you have worked on in the past. The third was an architecture overview with an engineer. The second session I could tell was detrimental to my chances because I hadn't built a system that could handle "millions of requests". Mind you this is a Full Stack Engineer role and NOT a platform architect role. While I understand the importance taking scale into consideration when you code, the fact that I had not worked on a project before that has scaled to millions of requests was somehow detrimental to my interviewer. Not everybody has that opportunity. The third interviewer seemed to have this narrative in her mind and if you veered away from on it in any way she would make faces and say "this is not a trick question". I legitimately built the problem she was trying to ask me how I would architect in the initial exercise a couple of days previously and they decided to move me forward. Because I didn't stick to whatever she had in her mind I guess she saw that as a detriment. In short, these people seem to expect everybody that comes on board to have built facebook or google by themselves otherwise you are not good enough.