The overall experience was rather average. It appears that the team is more focused on assessing candidates' abilities in theory rather than evaluating practical problem-solving skills for real-world job tasks. During the interview, I was questioned about reactivity, JavaScript event loop, and O(n). I shared my expertise in data types, including hash tables, linked lists, and trees. The interviewers seemed somewhat puzzled, throwing spontaneous questions my way, such as explaining how the event loop functions and the workings of garbage collection in JavaScript. I also provided a correct explanation of how to update indexedDB. Unfortunately, the interview ended with a rejection because I openly admitted that I hadn't delved extensively into garbage collection. However, I tried to convey that if I were developing my own programming language, I would create a dependency graph of functions and variables. My approach would involve unloading functions from memory as the interpreter traverses the graph and determines they have executed the required number of times. They corrected me, expressing a certain disdain, insisting that it's crucial to track references to functions, not just the number of calls. The primary reason for the rejection, as communicated to me, was their preference for a candidate with a more profound understanding of JavaScript than I demonstrated. Despite having successfully worked with JavaScript for the past nine years, building demanding and performant applications, I unfortunately struggled to articulate the intricacies of the garbage collection mechanism in my own words during the interview. One of the interviewers expressed surprise when I mentioned that there are more WebGL-compliant model formats besides OBJ. Specifically, I brought up .glb and .gltf, which are widely recognized as common formats for the web. However, the interviewer seemed genuinely confused, as if he thought I was making it up. It was a somewhat amusing moment, considering the prevalence of these formats in the industry.