The interview process consisted of a phone screen with a recruiter and a video call with the hiring manager. The recruiter was reasonably pleasant, but he went over the time we had scheduled for the call by 30 minutes. During this call, the recruiter told me the (noncompetitive) pay bands, that the position would require a significant amount of work, and I'd have to commute from a major tech hub city to a neighboring town to go into the office. At this point I should have just dropped out of the process, but I continued onto the next stage to see if the hiring manager would provide a different perspective. The video call with the hiring manager, however, was unpleasant. The hiring manager had a jarringly flat affect and made no effort to make the interview experience comfortable. He started by giving a confusing explanation of the role (which he contradicted later in the interview). Following that, he asked a series of generic data science interview questions without context to a larger goal or connection in theme. By the end of the interview, it became clear he was looking for one particular answer to each of these questions—not a discussion of the merits and flaws of potential approaches. He also became a rude; I suppose my answers had been displeasing. The following day, I received the rejection email saying the team was looking for "a stronger mix of technical acumen, domain expertise and communication skills." The reason I'm giving this interview a negative experience rating is that my time wasn't valued, the hiring manager was rude, and the feedback was useless. Feedback on an interview is only helpful insofar as it's actionable, and the feedback I was given doesn't remotely qualify as such—a simple form rejection email would suffice. It should go without saying, but the sales pitch of low pay, hard work, and a long commute doesn't inspire candidates to diligently prepare for their interviews. Treating candidates rudely under these circumstances adds insult to injury.