Comment by roncesvalles
11 hours ago
>a candidate’s willingness to invest time and effort
I guess it's a matter of opinion but my point is, this is probably the right metric. Arguably, the kind of people who shut up and play along with these stupid games because that's where the money is make better team players in large for-profit organizations than those who take a principled stance against ever touching Leetcode because their efforts wouldn't contribute anything to the art.
Maybe yes maybe not, I'm leaning not but it's just an opinion. But as a company be careful what you wish for, these same candidates are often skilled at gaming systems and may leave your team as soon as they've extracted the benefits. They’re likely more interested in playing the game than in seriously solving real-world problems.
Then what if the test was how well you play chess? That takes time to study to become good. But would it be a good metric for hiring programmers?
Because chess is more unrelated to the job? It is easy to see that LeetCode problems are closer to a programmers job than what chess is.
But yeah, people used to ask that level of unrelated questions to programmers, and they were happy with the results. "Why are manhole covers round" etc. LeetCode style questions do produce better results than those, so that is why they use them.
Then testing how they play Factorio will work better