One place I worked at did, by policy (D. E. Shaw & Co.).

It was also the place with the densest collection of high-achieving, highly intelligent colleagues that I’ve ever experienced.

DE Shaw rejected me after I submitted my SATs (not once, but twice).

What even is the point of living if society deems people like me to be inherently inferior for life?

Almost no place has this (fairly pointless IMO) policy in place. How predictive is the SAT test I took when I was 16 to my performance on the job a decade later?

You can actually take the SAT at any age, so I'd say there's no reason to not try and get a high score.

+1

You went to MIT so fairly predictive I think, as you just said it was the densest region of talent you’ve ever seen.

If you saw my resume you’d understand how hopeless it is for people like me. It’s depressing.

For my first jobs out of college, I listed my SAT scores.

EDIT: Don't understand the downvotes. I went to a top liberal arts college and they told us to, if it was over a certain number. It worked broadly speaking.

I did too. It specifically came up in interviews as a reason they brought me in.

Well, it is basically an IQ test.

In other words, an SAT score is most meaningful at the low end of the range?

Google used to ask college candidates (I was asked). I don't know if they still do.