He hasn't played any mind games. He's asked for exactly what he wants.
> if (!verified) return false;
Hint: I wrote it several years ago and in the surrounding context that it was added to, it literally saves lives. Do you think Elon would hire me?
Is what you do worth your salary? That is a pretty simple criteria, if you deliver significant value in basically any way that should be enough. Why do you think this is would be so hard? We had to write down reasoning like this to motivate our job at Google 1-2 times a year, it isn't hard to do.
My complaint isn't in the general concept of justifying your value. My complaint is in the request to have every coder in the company boil this down to such a simplistic representation of it on short notice in an environment where every indication is that it's going to be considered for a laughably small amount of time and then you might be fired on the spot if you didn't focus on the right axes.
I think the fact that this is happening to every coder at twitter in a few hours' span, coupled with the fact that thus far, the firings have been capricious, hasty, and based on apparently very little data. Nothing about these exercises seems to be "measured" in the "carefully considered" sense.
If you're thinking of these in contrast to standard performance evals that we all expect to have to do, you should also actually compare the processes in a meaningful way. Perf evals: you get weeks to work on them, you get to write a long-form essay making your case, you rarely ever get fired on the spot for not doing well, you get all manner of coaching and documentation about how to do well on them (including very specific tips on criteria for success). Compare and contrast with "bring me 10 screenshots of your code by 2pm today" along with the recent atmosphere of "anyone who doesn't meet the surprise criteria we just sprung on you is fired" and you wonder why people think this is absurd?
He can run his company how he wants, but this is way out of line with what I (and obviously many others) have come to expect. Don't understand the outrage? Well, this is the explanation. We've never had to put up with this shit before, and we don't feel like starting now. 1200 people quit yesterday. We still don't know how many were unwilling to jump through this latest dumb hoop. We shall see.
I agree that these exercises are neither measured, careful, or well coached.
It is a blunt and imperfect way to see who codes at all, who can articulate their job, who can handle uncertainty and pressure, and also who will follow orders.
Taking a screenshot and explaining your code is not some impossible task. People just don't like the stakes.
My point is that it seems like people are overly focusing and critical of the request itself, when when request is a practical way to meet the goal. it just happens that the goal is crazy, unmeasured, rash.
I agree it is out of line from what people want and expect. I'm not sure there is any way to cut >75% of staff and gut a company culture in weeks that would fit the expectations and desires of employees. The situation is unheard of.
I think that it's imperfect but probably an moderately effective way to compare employees for immediate dismissal. I would not like facing immediate dismissal.
I think the difference is that I don't think it is nearly as arbitrary as you do.
A person who can't do that lacks the soft skills to be an effective software engineer.