The first phase was an interview with the team. Everyone was gentle and respectful. It was a conversation about my career and background and they introduced the core challenges of the job position. I got approved. The following phase was an online assessment. They sent the syllabus. I studied really hard for several days to feel more prepared. The coding questions could be solved with SK-Learn, basically. Some questions were confusing, and more than one answer would be correct (even though you were supposed to choose only one). I got a pass. My grade? I have no idea. After, there was a Q&A interview session; this is when everything became a nightmare. There were three DS interviewers. The woman, who was the main and mean one. Another interviewer seemed to be a gentle and nice guy (but I'm sure he wouldn't stand for or against her decisions). The other DS barely greeted the group and was typing during the entire interview. Keeping notes? Replying e-mails? Who knows. The woman was really arrogant. At first, she said: "you can't read anything during the interview." I thought: "ok, I wasn't expecting I'd google anything." I only replied: "okay." After she said: "even though you don't know an answer, it doesn't mean you'll fail." I replied okay again. Her questions were confusing, I couldn't even understand and the nice DS had to clarify. More than once, I was thinking and replying to the question, and she interrupted and rudely spoke "this is not what I asked." I've been interviewed by bigger and more powerful companies and smaller ones too, I ensure it has never happened. She seemed to be incapable of managing her emotions. There was a moment she asked me what I would do if the business team requested me a fraud detection model with 100% accuracy. I said it would be impossible because of overfitting, I'd tell them that if the model is 100% accurate, it means it wouldn't generalize well and that fraud detection is an adversarial scenario. She insisted. I said we had to define admissible false positive and false negative percentages. She said it was not possible to talk to the business panel. I said it simply would not work without the business colleagues defining the bounds, and she seemed to be pissed off. I've never felt so disrespected and uncomfortable during an interview in my entire life, it seemed that every single word I said was wrong. The Q&A session was expected to last an hour, it took exactly an hour and 30 minutes. Obviously, I failed. I got the feedback after begging for an answer with the HR. Well, it seems that even though I'd been part of a world-class university and I master DS; for the company, it is reasonable to include in the feedback that I could not explain linear regression (BTW, I'd been a lecturer for a while, of course I know how to explain it), that I don't understand models and parameters, that all my explanations were superficial (remember that the interview was half hour longer than expected; it seems that everyone enjoyed looking at each others' faces wasting time during the silence because if I know things superficially, this is the only way to fill the time gap when talking about DS), and I'm not suitable even for an entry-level job. She would fail anyone on earth if she didn't like her/him/them for any reason. I don't even know her, but I'm sure she's a horrible person after I realized what she did to me. Thankfully, I got an offer as a mid-level DS from another company. This process was unethical and I hope this woman does not interview several candidates with this biased and unfair PoV. Such a waste of time! It took a lot of time and nothing positive came out. At least I had an experience: if you apply for a DS job position, you should pray so that this woman won't interview you. If she doesn't like you, you'll fail, regardless of your skills.