<p>Can you really measure this? </p>
<p>[Smartest</a> People of 2010 - Galleries - The Daily Beast](<a href=“http://www.thedailybeast.com/galleries/2471/1/]Smartest”>http://www.thedailybeast.com/galleries/2471/1/)</p>
<p>I would agree with Steve Jobs, Mark Zuckerburg, and Julian Assange.</p>
<p>I’ve heard of too many of these people, so I don’t agree with the list. It’s not the smartest people of 2010, it’s the most visibly influential smart people of 2010. The smartest people are likely toiling away behind the scenes, never to receive credit for their work.</p>
<p>Kanye West?</p>
<p>I don’t want to live on this planet anymore.</p>
<p>I don’t know about Kanye West being on the list. Undoubtedly his album was great, but I know he was in the recording studio in Hawaii with Kid Cudi during his exile, and I’m sure that Cudi played a major role in pulling this out of Kanye.</p>
<p>I think we need to redefine what constitutes being smart. I can agree that being influential and innovative would constitute as “smart” because not too many people possess rhetorical and entrepreneurial skills. But there are too many people, as Hawkwings stated, that aren’t getting the credit they deserve for what is the primary definition of “smart.”</p>
<p>I think you guys might want to look at this. Look at the 5th slide.</p>
<p>[15</a> Ridiculously Hard Job Interview Questions From Top Employers Like Google, Goldman Sachs](<a href=“15 Ridiculously Hard Job Interview Questions From Top Employers Like Google, Goldman Sachs | HuffPost Impact”>15 Ridiculously Hard Job Interview Questions From Top Employers Like Google, Goldman Sachs | HuffPost Impact)</p>
<p>^ Mind = blown</p>
<p>@akhman24 I wouldn’t give Cudi nearly that much credit.</p>
<p>Looks like a pretty solid list to me. These types of lists pretty much always only apply to people in the public eye. What are you guys expecting?</p>
<p>House of London, the room isn’t the room in the picture, the room is the room the person is being interviewed in. </p>
<p>I think the trick there is that some people may try to simply divide an estimated room volume by an estimated ball volume, but you can’t do that. There is a lot of room in between balls that simply can’t be filled up. The amount that you could fit, if it were perfectly organized, would be the ratio of the size of a sphere inside the area of a cube. So you take:</p>
<p>( Volume of Room / Volume of Ball )<em>.525 (The ratio of the volume of a sphere to a cube is 4</em>pi/24. I know pi is about 5% larger than 3, and that if I estimated it to be 3, I would get 12/24 which is .5. Add 5% and I get .525)</p>
<p>The question isn’t very hard (at least it isn’t very hard if that is an appropriate answer).</p>
<p>The hard ones are those open ended ones.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>what’s the answer to number 6? I mean in each race of 5 horses, you get 3 to come out on top in each of the 5 races, right? At the end of round 1, you get 15 of the fastest horses. By the same process, 3 races of 5 horses produce 9 horses. After that, you get 2 races that produce 6 of the fastest horses. Then… idk what to do with the remaining 6… but you would need 2 more races to figure out who the 3 fastest are.</p>
<p>maybe it’s a trick question. Can’t you just hold 5 races, and record the times of the horses and pick the 3 horses with the fastest times?</p>
<hr>
<h1>7 is 10 right? binary… but of course you’d have to know 2^10=1024 off the top of your head… I likes these questions. Memories from my HS math club.</h1>
<p>ISUClub, the question #6 doesn’t ask anything (minimum number of races required for what? A condition is needed.), so you can’t answer it. Whoever wrote the article (or whatever you call it) is messing up.</p>
<p>For #7, if we’re using binary search (which is the best option as far as I know) then yes, it will take ceil(log(1000)) to search through 1000 entries, which is 10. However, that seems very easy, so there must be some trick to it. Either that or in the interview you’re timed on that. </p>
<p>The other one which isn’t too difficult is the Apple one on slide 9. </p>
<p>Beyond that I don’t really know what to say for any of them.</p>
<p>Also, I realized that for my answer to #5, that assumes the room is rectangular. If the room is pyramid shaped or spherical or something like that it will be different.</p>
<p>required for picking the 3 fastest horses of course. I don’t think they want you to analyze the technicalities of their sentences.</p>
<p>There are further ambiguities…</p>
<p>What information can be obtained in a race? Can I time horses? Can I rank horses in individual races?</p>
<p>I will take the guess that you get to rank within races, but not time (because that makes the problem trivial). If you can rank fully through an individual race.</p>
<p>You run 5 races, and take the 3 fastest from each. Then you take all the first place winners, and two of the 2nd place winners. You are guaranteed the fastest horse is in that race. </p>
<p>If the horse that is first in that race didn’t have the 2nd place winner in that race, then the next race should be between the top three of that race, and the 2nd and 3rd place of the first race that the first place winner in that last race was in (hard to follow, but I can’t do any better).</p>
<p>Else, if all the first place horses are in the top three, then you need no further races.</p>
<p>Else, if any other combination exists, you go through a logical process equivalent to the one before (before the previous else if). </p>
<p>The worst case is 7, the best case is 6. </p>
<p>Again, this assumes that I guessed at what the question was asking me correctly.</p>
<p>Guys, that post mentioning the interview questions slide wasn’t for this thread. I made a mistake by posting it here but w/e I guess it’s worth discussing. lol</p>
<p>I agree with some of this list, but come on - some of them are a stretch. I’m perfectly willing to accept that this list of the “smartest” people is technically more like a list of the “smartest public figures,” and I agree with a lot of the selections - Craig Venter, for instance, along with Steve Jobs, Felisa Wolfe-Simon, and several others on the list (I love Jon Stewart and I really admire Michelle Rhee). But seriously…Kanye West? He creates great music, but I think he’s hardly in contention for the “smartest person of 2010.” Yes, he has musical brilliance, but his decisions outside of the music world aren’t always the best.</p>
<p>I think you guys are missing the big picture here.</p>
<p>I don’t think many of these questions even have answers. I’m pretty sure they’re meant to be open ended. Some of the questions need to be qualified, like the one about the horse race. I know in banking interviews, they ask a lot of questions like these just to see how you handle the stress and how it affects the way you think. The best way to answer these types of questions is to qualify the question (apply your own conditions, “if…”), communicate your thought process as you come to a conclusion, and never appear stressed or at a loss for words. </p>
<p>Some of the more quantitaive positions I would imagine they’d like you to reason through the question similar to what Vladen did.</p>
<p>Wouldn’t the facebook question be 1? You need to make at least one guess to guess a number, and if you guess the number on the first guess, then you would only need one guess.</p>