So, even though my resume clearly shows years of experience in genetic molecular analysis, and clearly shows very little experience with chemical analysis and chromatography technology, the hiring manager still decided to interview me. Oddly enough, knowing my background, he still decided to 'pressure test' me with a 'pop-quiz' of my encyclopedic knowledge of chemical compounds. What's a Glycan? What I should have done and what I encourage other interviewers to do when posed with arbitrary encyclopedic questions like this (especially as interviews are usually remote calls these days) is to tell the interviewer that you need a few seconds to look up the exact answer on Wikipedia. A company that's basing hiring decisions on random questions that can be easily looked up on the internet in a matter of seconds, is making pot hiring decisions. In highschool Chemistry, we had to memorize the periodic table. But in college chemistry, the entire table was painted on the wall of the classroom. Instructors knew that professionals can always look up rote information, so why bother memorizing it? They knew that the true test is in understanding and applying complex concepts. So, Waters, if you want to be an innovative company, don't hire an encyclopedia that can regurgitate basic knowledge on a dime. Hire people who think about concepts creatively. You too have been judged, and found wanting.