[noodleman]

This is a good assessment. 1 and 2 are why the system won't change, but I don't think they were intentionally designed with that in mind. I think it's a hang over from academia, bearing in mind how many of the top engineers at FAANG are PhDs.

Well, that and how almost nobody who successfully finds employment after "grinding" leetcodes wants to remove the barriers for entry.

I think Leetcoders can't envisage a better way to assess someone than by subjecting them to the same kind of hoop-jumping you get made to do in university. They're not interviewing you for a job as there's no module on interviewing candidates on the CS curriculum, and don't have much professional experience outside of academics or software engineering. They're simulating a dissertation defence, because that's how they were assessed for their competence.

That's my charitable interpretation. If I'm being cynical, it's elitism - a way of making sure you're "one of us" (read: obnoxiously academic, Type-A personality, "logic over feelings").

[KaiserPro]

> how many of the top engineers at FAANG are PhDs.

Not that many, but its interesting how many are from "elite" universities. I'm in a research org for a FAANG and we often get to see all the handwringing about how we can't recruit more of people type x.

Well, if you only hire from MIT, Stanford, Oxford etc, then they are all going to look the same.

For those outside the research org, its a bit better, but its still the most uneven place I've worked.