-3

Given: two condoms, and three women any of whom may be carrying an STD.
You would like to have safe sex with each of them.

Question: describe algoritm how can you do so, while ensuring that no STD is passed from one woman (or possibly himself) to another (or to himself)?

6
Contributors
12
Replies
65
Views
4 Years
Discussion Span
Last Post by deceptikon
0

2 things...

  1. Your question doesn't show any effort of you doing anything nor is it the most appropriate question.
  2. Why would this be a job interview question?
0

describe algorithm how can you do so, while ensuring that no STD is passed around?

The more appropriate version of the exact same question is this:

You have three very dirty surfaces to clean but only two handkerchiefs. Assuming you cannot fold the handkerchiefs, how would you go about cleaning all the surfaces without getting your own hand dirty?

The answer is that you stack the two clean handkerchiefs for the first surface, then remove the dirty one and set it aside for the second surface, and then you take it again, flip it and stack the two handkerchiefs with the dirty sides facing each other, and clean the last surface. Then, you end up with three clean surfaces, three dirty sides of a handkerchief, while your hand remained on the same (still clean) side of one of the handerchiefs.

(I'll let you figure out how this solution translates to the original question, not particularly nice to describe in words)

This certainly requires some algorithmic thinking, and in that sense, is a reasonable interview question, however, the context chosen for the question is quite inappropriate. Possibly making the interviewee uncomfortable is not a good way to conduct an interview, you want the interviewee to get uncomfortable only if his lack of competence is exposed, not his personal reservations at discussing sensitive topics.

Clearly not an interview question as such a question would be illegal (in both your country and mine).

Illegal? Really? It's a stupid context to choose for the question, but what's illegal about it? It's not a personal question (not asking about your sexual habits, although the use of the impersonal "you" pronoun could be misinterpreted, I guess, if the interviewee's English isn't very good), nor does it aim to discriminate. Unless, of course, it's being asked in a very creepy or misogynistic way, but that's another story, now we're talking sexual harrasment or gender discrimination, both of which are illegal, of course. But, at face value, there is nothing illegal about the question, AFAIK.

0

Illegal? Really? It's a stupid context to choose for the question, but what's illegal about it?

If the interviewee chose to be offended and filed a lawsuit, I can all but guarantee that they'd win on grounds of sexual harrassment and/or discrimination.

0

Which post? If you mean the OP, then that would delete the thread and be unfair to anyone who replied. It's also doesn't break any rules, so I can't justify deleting it anyway.

Edited by deceptikon

0

Which post? If you mean the OP, then that would delete the thread and be unfair to anyone who replied. It's also doesn't break any rules, so I can't justify deleting it anyway.

Guess that is reasonable enough for me.

0

If the interviewee chose to be offended and filed a lawsuit, I can all but guarantee that they'd win on grounds of sexual harrassment and/or discrimination.

Wow, good to know, I'll watch my back more carefully next time I'm in the US (not that I don't already). In most places, such a lawsuit would be labeled as frivolous and be dismissed with prejudice (or worse). You can't just point your finger at someone and expect the courts to indulge you, nor can you conflate a subjectively inappropriate question into an accusation of sexual harassment or discrimination. I guess the US courts have a much lower threshold on that, I guess that's why Americans are so quick to sue. Also, there is a big difference between winning a case in court for damages / trauma (which requires the establishment of a civil tort), and something being illegal (i.e., a crime), e.g., having to pay damages for a car crash that you caused doesn't mean that having a car accident is illegal (it means you are responsibly for the wrong-doing, but the wrong-doing is not illegal).

I doubt very much that a US criminal court would convict a person of sexual harassment (an illegal act) for asking this question. Sexual harassment has to be either a coersive request for sexual favor (coersion by force, power, favor, etc.) or relentless and repeated innuendos or inappropriate comments, this case doesn't even come anywhere close to that, and generally a one-time incident (a comment, a whistle, etc.) cannot constitute grounds for harassment, this would be crazy (and US laws explicitly establish that, now that I checked).

As for discrimination (also illegal), you would have a very difficult time convincing a (sane) judge that this question was intended as a filter (I guess you mean discrimination against easily offendable people?). What a convoluted case that would be. If you ask a question about maximizing the profits that a butcher makes from cutting up a pig, can muslims, jews and vegetarians claim discrimination? The law is generally more reasonable than people think.

At best, you could make a case that the interviewer would be liable for a civil tort, but even that is a stretch, IMHO.

0

Also, there is a big difference between winning a case in court for damages / trauma (which requires the establishment of a civil tort), and something being illegal (i.e., a crime)

Apologies, I meant the former and said the latter on the (apparently faulty) assumption that my meaning would be understood.

This topic has been dead for over six months. Start a new discussion instead.
Have something to contribute to this discussion? Please be thoughtful, detailed and courteous, and be sure to adhere to our posting rules.