[NoOneNew]

I think you missed the entire point of these articles. The algorithms you're forced to memorize are, 99% of the time, useless. Instead of hiring someone by their track record, managers are choosing to hire those capable of memorizing trivia.

Part 2, paying someone on trivia instead of capabilities is not sustainable. The company ends up suffering in the long term. Other engineers that are actually capable have to pick up the slack. Longer hours, less family time, higher burn out risk. Then comes the firing period because the company is losing revenue due to rampant incompetence. Putting even more pressure on the capable engineers. There's plenty of articles where trendy startups have some brutal layoffs, even though 12-18 months earlier had massive funding rounds and went into "extreme" hiring phases. The chickens come home to roost, no matter the sparkling bling of big paychecks.

[matz1]

I think you missed the point of this interview style. This style of interview is scalable, predictable, efficient and effective. It is useful in that way.

[Apocryphon]

It's scalable all right, but the other points- especially the latter two- are being debated in this thread.

[matz1]

Right, which misses the point of having this interview style in the first place.