I don't think this approach would scale, due to the time investment required. It also suffers from making it hard to compare one candidate to another in a fair way, unless you have everyone fix the same bugs. Having a bunch of canned bugs to be fixed doesn't seem much better than asking a CS puzzle.

I Lways ask people to slave a simplified version of an actual problem I have worked on recently. Some times I even learn some thing.

Comparing candidates is irrelevant. You just want N hires that can contribute in your environment.

Using the same multipliers for everyone is bound to be sub-optimal, due to Parkinson's law.

I think a better analogy is

Conservative: the existing system must not break!

Progressive: we must add new features!

This individual joined Google in 2009, and left before he'd been there 3 years. He's in no position to be waxing nostalgic about the "good old days" of Google.

This is a good case for providing state-funded public computer centers, but not such a good case for continuing to fund large collections of books.

Where are the tests?

Oh, thanks. I was starting to feel weird because nobody was saying anything about the lack of tests.

HN may or may not work as a code review platform, but I don't think I would use myself a 3rd party software that doesn't provide tests.

Sorry to be pedantic, but a 9th chord actually has a 9th and a _flat_ 7th. For example C9 has the notes C-E-G-Bb-D. 9th chords are part of the dominant group, not the major group.

A chord with a 9th and a 7th is a _major_ 9th. For example, the chord C-E-G-B-D is Cmaj9 (sometimes written C triangle 9).

Well, I'm assuming by convention that the 7th is flattened, as the notation "C7" does.

I think the convention for chord notation is different to the convention for scale degrees. The 7th note in C major is B, but a C7 has a Bb.

Major 7 chords are explicitly written as such. So in the case of a C chord with a major 7, it would be noted as Cmaj7.