Video chat interview, take-home test, and on-site interview. I was asked uninspired, cookie-cutter questions during the on-site (nothing you wouldn't have already seen if you actively practice for coding interviews), but I fumbled slightly with a couple of my answers to the white-boarding questions due to nerves I think. I feel I got the general idea, just didn't execute perfectly. Frustrating, especially since I could go home and solve the exact same problems with ease in a more comfortable environment. Admittedly, I didn't spend too much time practicing coding algorithms on a whiteboard before I went to the on-site. I had been much too busy building real software and solving problems that actually matter -- shame on me. Remember guys/gals, it doesn't matter how many apps you've shipped or how many professional references you have, but it sure matters that you can write a function to add two binary strings (literally was asked this, what an irrelevant question...). I don't want to beat a dead horse here, but putting a candidate in front of a whiteboard for hours at a time is really unnatural. Like, I'm not going to go to work the first day and ask everyone to join me in the conference room because I have a code I need to share. I can't believe that having software engineers write code on a whiteboard is still done in 2017 -- it's not LiveStories' fault though. Everyone still does it. It's a comically-bad way to evaluate candidates in my opinion, however. Anyway, I would have given me a chance but I think they were looking for perfection. At least they got back to me really quickly, which is why I rated this interview experience as "positive".