>This is not different to what is being described in TFA -- you do discuss with the interview in order to reach the solution It's very different. If the interv

>This is not different to what is being described in TFA -- you do discuss with the interview in order to reach the solution It's very different. If the interviewer already knows the answer and is careful not to give it away, it creates an artificially adversarial process that is completely divorced from the reality of the job. Working together to solve a common problem is a much more accurate work sample test. >if you just lash out the solution without revealing your thinking process, many interviewers get disappointed and may throw you another problem. Knowing the answer upfront makes it much easier to explain your thought process in a way that makes you look smart. Many (most?) companies doing leetcode interviews are more interested in you correctly solving x number of medium-hard problems than they are in hearing how you think. >They are also not very fair -- they are skewed towards people with more free time at home That's why I've given them as one alternative among several. >so you have do the whiteboard discussion afterwards. You can talk to them about the problem and ask them to explain their decisions. Also if someone cheats and the result is that you hire a fake programmer, fire them. >this is practically the opposite of fairness Leetcode interviews aren't more "fair" they just test a different skill than other types of interviews. The hope is that the skill they test is more correlated with job performance than other types of interviews. I don't think that's true.