[modoc]

I suspect the point is that having heard of and bothered to read one of her books, whether you liked or agreed with it or not, probably implies various things about you.

A) You socialize(d) with people who read things that aren't sold in the grocery store.

B) You not only know how to read, but most likely voluntarily read a 700+ page book in your spare time in order to learn/see what it was about/etc...

C) If you can speak about what was in the book, and what you thought about it, you can follow the plot of a 700+ page book, you can understand the points the author was making, perhaps you can intuit the not-very-subtle philosophical and societal messages she was delivering, and you can discuss how you agree or disagree with those messages.

It's no IQ test, but frankly it's probably a much better question than "Do you have a degree?".

At least I'd rather work with people who have read a book like that, and have an opinion on it's content and the author's points (even if they hated the book/points/etc...), than the average CS degree graduate.

[wehriam]

Very few people are hiring based on an understanding of objectivism. Data structures and algorithms on the other hand...

[modoc]

I'd rather work with a smart, well read person who likes to think than someone who hasn't read much.

Sure asking about Ayn Rand isn't really an intelligence test, but it's not a bad start. Smart people can learn about data structures and algorithms. Slow people who've managed to get a CS degree from some random college may have learned enough to pass, but there's no demonstration of smarts there.

I'm hiring based on people being smart, self-motivated, willing to learn, willing to think, and people I can hold a conversation with. Teaching someone like that how data structures work is a lot easier than teaching a degree holder how to be someone I want to work with and someone I can trust to be on the ball as new technologies come out.

[erdos2]

Exactly.