← Back to context

Comment by corimaith

21 hours ago

>The point of these problems is to test your cleverness.

No it's just memorization of 12 or so specific patterns. The stakes are too high that virtually everyone going in will not be staking passing on their own inherent problem solving ability. LeetCode has been so thoroughly gamified that it has lost all utility of differentiability beyond willingness to prepare.

Yeah, it tests if the candidate enjoys the programming-adjacent puzzle game of LeetCode, which is a perfectly decent game to play, but it is just a signal.

If somebody grinds LeetCode while hating it, it signals they are really desperate for a job and willing to jump through hoops for you.

If somebody actually enjoys this kind of stuff, that is probably a signal that they are a rare premium nerd and you should hire them. But the probably play Project Euler as well (is that still up?).

If somebody figures out a one-trick to minmax their LeetCode score… I dunno, I guess it means they are aware of the game and want to solve it efficiently. That seems clever to me…

Given this consider that LeetCode solving is rarely ever part of your work. So then, what are they selecting for with the habit?

  • Selecting for people like themselves.

    • I think this is one of the more true answers but can you be more specific?

      Like in race? Like in wealth? Like in defection willingness? Like in corruption?

      Asking for a friend who is regularly identified as among the most skilled but feels their career has been significantly derailed by this social phenomenon.

      7 replies →

In defense of questions like this, “willingness to prepare” is a significant differentiator

  • But what is it differentiating? And is it really the best evidence of willingness to prepare? My MSc and BA on the topics, my open source contributions, two decades of industry experience... Those aren't evidence of not only willingness but execution of preparation?

    • The papers and open source indicate that you can build stuff. That's not what it's testing for.

      Will you put up with very long hours of insane grindy nonsense in the spirit of being a team player for a team that doesn't really remember what game they're playing?

      Are you sufficiently in need of income to be fighting through this interview dance in preference to other things, such that once you join you'll be desperate to stay?

      Those are extremely important questions, and a willingness to have spent a thousand hours memorising leetcode correlates strongly with the attributes sought.

    • It is a differentiator when you are hiring straight from college. The fact we use this beyond entry level roles is a sign the company has lost the thread and is cargo culting.

  • That they would ask me to prepare for that is a signal as well.

    In no case is it a useful signal on if I can do my job better than someone else. Some people like this type of problem and are good at it anyway which is a good signal compared to average - but there are also above average people who don't enjoy this type of problem and so don't practice it. Note that both cases the people I'm talking about did not memorize the problem and solution.

  • That willingness to prepare doesn't reconcile with the realities of parenthood and all of the other responsibilities someone in their thirties may have. Consistently finding that time will be a huge ask, especially if you haven't worked on those problems in a while.

    • I mean, it would be illegal for them to state it outright, but most companies would prefer not to hire people with kids and other responsibilities. That's the whole reason there are specific discrimination laws for that.

      1 reply →