I agree with most of your post, except for: >But IMHO there's no harm in being challenged like this anymore than being asked to complete basic training to be in

I agree with most of your post, except for: >But IMHO there's no harm in being challenged like this anymore than being asked to complete basic training to be in the military, even though you might just be a tech-support soldier. I would agree if the big companies making the demands on these candidates assumed the burden of training. You don't have to spend $60k for a degree, spend hundreds of hours grinding leetcode, and have a portfolio of side projects to join the military. > don't think Google interviewers are interested in you solving the problem and getting the correct answer, they are interested in seeing how you work I think Google (and other companies) think this is what they are doing, but unfortunately there's no way to ensure that this is actually what HMs/interviewers are screening for. For every one good interviewer that cares about thought process, etc. there are three interviewers that want to see the candidate fail to prove they are superior and justified in having the job they do. I enjoyed your story, and am glad things worked out for you - but as others have pointed out, you are most certainly the exception to the rule. Why are we using exceptions as the baseline for 'standard'?