It doesn't seem like science, or it's selectively chosen science. If we must do these tests, I should be able to take one or a few of these and keep that as a

It doesn't seem like science, or it's selectively chosen science. If we must do these tests, I should be able to take one or a few of these and keep that as a record and not have to do them again. But instead, I have to repeat the process for every company that gives them (recently, Berkshire-Hathaway and it had to be done before anyone would even speak about the position). These things rarely test for job-specific skills and are supposedly generalized intelligence tests, so the skills should be widely applicable, and therefore I shouldn't have to repeat this often. Hell, I do less for a drivers license renewal and 2 tons of metal at 60 mph is more lethal than most jobs behind these tests. Typically they've been math, reading comprehension, word association, memory, personality, and abstract/spatial thinking, which, frankly, was already done through high school and college. If the goal was finding signals for successful applicants, they already have had these signals. To me, that says they're less interested in finding out how smart you are, and it's really more of a filtering tool where science is being used to give it more credibility than it deserves. And of course, referring to the article, because it's AI, there's a gray area of accountability that I don't think the legal process has caught up with yet.