[feralmoan]

> "the interview process is this largely protocol driven song and dance where you're supposed to scratch your head and be wowed by the technical question and then slowly and painfully make incremental progress on a solution while the interviewer can feel smug about knowing it all along and maybe they can help you along the way. If you blurt out a good approximation in the first thirty seconds, that ruins the whole courtship."

Your friend is exactly right, and there's plenty of competitive companies out there not demanding you physically take up a whiteboard marker to cock-swing out some algorithm in a political kowtow ritual. Asking for an answer or illustration of deductive process to a non-trivial question is a good litmus test of both talent AND enthusiasm/presence and provides entry points for deeper technical discussion but relying on a '2 line perl implementation of log(log^n-dimension) reimann curvature' as a source of truth rather than understanding the person you're humiliating and how they can augment your team if the Ruby Beard of Magic approves is absolutely absurd. Unless you don't care about the people or culture you're creating and just want the work done of course, because money money or whatever :D