Perguntas de entrevista da empresa Quantori

One of the most unpleasant interview experiences I’ve had in recent years. The initial conversation with the recruiter was pleasant and went smoothly. However, the technical interview that followed — a two-hour session with two engineers — felt more like an oral exam with the strictest and most disengaged professor than a professional interview. One of the engineers (Engineer A) was communicative, supportive, and showed genuine interest in my experience and approach. Unfortunately, the other engineer (Engineer B) was the complete opposite: cold, passive-aggressive, and uninterested in learning about my background, projects, or how I approach solving problems. His focus was solely on whether I could recall the exact terminology for specific Python features — particularly around tasks, coroutines, and threads — rather than engaging in a thoughtful technical discussion. Engineer B seemed poorly prepared for the interview. He complained about his internet connection, had issues with his equipment, and kept turning his camera on and off throughout the call, which added to the overall lack of professionalism. The interview began with 20 minutes of repeated questioning about my past project transitions. Despite providing clear and consistent answers, Engineer B was visibly dissatisfied and kept returning to the same topic. At one point, I even heard him mutter “Oh my God” in response to one of my answers — a reaction that struck me as inappropriate and dismissive. It also became apparent that Engineer A and Engineer B were not aligned on how to conduct the interview. They disagreed on certain points during the discussion and at times seemed on the verge of arguing. The whole process felt disorganized and tense from start to finish. When I asked questions about the team, company processes, and current projects, the only answer I received was “It depends on the team.” I was also told that they follow a waterfall-style development process, which was surprising for a tech company. Engineer B mentioned he had been with the company for over five years, which led me to believe that this kind of behavior might be considered acceptable within the broader company culture. Based on this experience, I decided to withdraw from the process.

The Good: HR interview was usual, it did not take much time to schedule it. Most of the technical interview questions were on topic and refreshed some knowledge around corner-cases. The Bad: Planning of technical interview took more time. In the first instance I asked to postpone it, I did not expect it to be a 2-hour one, it took them a little less than 2 business weeks to reschedule it. The level of the DevOps was not specified, but they clearly state they needed an experienced Linux professional. The Ugly: the technical interview... was far "by the book" technical. There were not much of architectural question (like 1 or 2 tiny ones) and surprisingly there were no live terminal assignments (even if they search for an experienced Linux person). Here are some types of questions that stood out to me the most: 1. Asking about niche edge cases or niche settings/configs. chmod 1711 vs 711. 2. Asking about overall behavior of the tool. Quote: What is the difference between root in OS and root in a container. (Implying behavioral difference) I will cut to the chase, the whole thing felt like I was doing the theoretical part of the driving test. The coding or terminal skills were of none of interest. The same goes for architectural (drawing) tests, there were none.