But I don’t think I would want to work for a company full of people hired via that process. I’ve met too many smart people(tm) who spend more time arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of pin than they spend figuring out how they can ship software faster/better/profitably.

I don't understand why you feel it's necessary to share your personal justifications (rationalizations), other than you're trying to normalize your own mediocrity. Which, by definition, already is normal.

In the real world, where your job as a software engineer is to translate business requirements into working systems, algorithms are of little value when solving problems can involve a combination of knowing how to ask the right questions, knowing the underlying architecture, knowing the industry/ecosystem well enough to know when to build versus when to find someone else to do the “undifferentiated heavy lifting”, etc.

But if in your own words “you studied for an interview”, it’s not exactly showing that you have a special skillset if all someone has to do is study for a month.

If you’re an experienced software engineer and companies aren’t beating down your door and you’re still randomly applying for jobs and jumping through the same hoops as someone just graduating from college - you’re doing it wrong.

Call it caring about ones profession and having a just hiring culture if you must.

That 90%+ of the hiring signal can be projected onto "hours spent on leetcode" is exactly why this process has become a parody of itself.

Who cares. It might as well be experimental theatre for all I care. If I want the job, I'll put in the effort. It's that simple.

Using your simple logic, the company could ask you to walk on all fours and eat grass and you'd put in the effort, if you want the job.

We're irritated with the current interview practices, because the gauntlet that many of us have to run is not only wasteful, but it's also harming the profession. If one has to jump through the same old hoops their entire professional life only to be thrown out at 40, what's the point of building a career in software engineering?

Solving problems directly related to the field in which I'm claiming expertise is in no way a damaging to my dignity.

I did that nearly 20 years ago. Why do I need to do it now?

Because you are applying for a job where the interview requires you to answer that sort of questions. Maybe you don't want that job so much, and that's okay. Personally, I would refuse to do take-home projects, and that's also okay.

Why did you do it 20 years ago?

I was in University and had exams.

Because you want the job.

If you don't put in the work, someone else will.

These are high paying positions. You can't just expect to lazily stroll in.

Getting past the interview isn't the only step to being fine. I also want to work at a company where my co-workers know what they're doing. When the hiring process uses an irrelevant filter, you end up filtering out qualified people and letting in unqualified people.

I worked at a place with a demanding interview process for about 3 years and the people I worked with were excellent. Nobody is making you do anything you don't want to do. So drop the attitude and the childish entitlement.

I'm not sure what you think my attitude and entitlement are. I can handle the interview process fine without studying. It plays to my strengths. I've only worked at places with demanding interview processes.

My concern is about the success of the company I work at. My coworkers tend to be excellent when the bar is a tough algorithms interview, but they can't hire enough people. I'm a particularly demanding interviewer. I've rejected candidates who failed miserably, then later learned from my excellent coworkers that the candidate I rejected was excellent at their job.

I've also referred an excellent coworker from a previous job, only to have them fail the interview process. My current company would have benefited greatly from that hire, but instead rejected a talented person for a role they were having trouble filling.

If a company is having trouble hiring, it needs to at least get these excellent people that are being filtered out. Lowering the bar to let these excellent people in also lets in much less qualified people. Instead, the filter needs to be changed to let in people based on how qualified they are rather than how good they are at algorithm puzzles.

Successful companies need more than just people who are good at algorithms like me and studious people like you.