> Because it's quick to test how good someone is at competitive programming, it's easy to grade everyone consistently, and it (somewhat) correlates with actual

> Because it's quick to test how good someone is at competitive programming, it's easy to grade everyone consistently, and it (somewhat) correlates with actual programming ability. I'd agree. Competitive programming does correlate with actual coding ability. The category of people who find it satisfying, earning ranks from a website - that's what bothers me. Young talents who've got all the time needed to earn score, they do it. What about the rest of our veterans? How fair is it to keep a website rank as a baseline for job in the real world. I don't know many who find competitive programming fascinating, after 5 years solving real problems for real people. I may be wrong here. Please disapprove/acknowledge me in the comments. It's a deep problem. Not a lot of organizations can afford the short-term contracting method. I agree. But I consider the cumulative star counts of their github projects, way better a metric than a rank from a website. There's no one right solution to this. But competitive programming score is IMO a very wrong direction to go. We are very much capable of coming up with better solutions. That's what we are good at :)