(As a sidenote, the author just comes across as whiny because he's not treated as the special snowflake he really is. If you're so insulted by being asked to do

(As a sidenote, the author just comes across as whiny because he's not treated as the special snowflake he really is. If you're so insulted by being asked to do FizzBuzz, then you ought to be able to knock it out in Brainfuck if required. But maybe you can't, eh, Mr. Hotshot?) I remember going through a phase, probably around my mid-20s, when I got quite insulted by being asked to do such simple tasks in interviews. I never showed that during the interviews, obviously, but I had qualifications and several years of experience writing real production software, so what kind of idiot did they think I was and how was writing fizz-buzz going to demonstrate what I could do?! A few years later, having more often sat on the other side of the interview table, I had learned that the number of people who have somehow achieved impressive looking qualifications from reputable institutions, gained several years of professional experience, and yet really can't write fizz-buzz, is astonishing. Trivial programming exercises aren't there to determine a good programmer's level of skill, they're there to stop the interviewer wasting several hours on a no-chance candidate who slipped past the screening process and accidentally wound up face-to-face. You get to the interesting stuff that actually tells you something about the candidate after that, and if they're any good at all, your trivial challenge will be a two minute diversion that they solve while probably having a friendly chat with you about something else at the same time. It's a little surprising to me that someone with as much experience as the author describes here hasn't realised this yet. It was one of the very first lessons I learned as soon as I started helping with interviewing candidates.