| I don't think it will stop unless 1) It's illegal. 2) It's ineffective 3) It's not economical for the company. To stop the trend you have to achieve one of the three. Similar to algorithms itself, interviewing is essentially searching for people that the company wants. How a company interviews candidates define its effectiveness (hire the right person, less false positives, less false negatives) and cost (how much does the company spend on the interview process per hire). Interviewing with LeetCode is acceptable effective: candidates.filter(leetCode) gives you a much smaller set of people good at algorithm brain teasers, and this set of people have acceptable approximation with the set of ideal candidates. In other word, it's a lazy but effective enough. The majority of companies will only switch to alternatives when the cost is lower, or substantially more effective. It's broken from the candidates perspective, but not the companies'. Most companies will stick to "if it ain't broke don't fix it" unless we offer them 10x solutions - which is yet to be seen. But I can also see it the other way around, we can undermine the effectiveness or cost for all companies: if we can develop better courses and bootcamps, letting more people hack LeetCode problems quickly. And then companies will naturally go for harder problems. In the end, the problems will be ridiculously hard that the companies can only filter people who memorizes LeetCode, and those set of people have virtually no correlation of good hires (good problem solving skills). And of course, it's also a profitable business to teach people this. |