> If someone can pass an interview, this person deserves a chance, no matter the background. Eh... This is the problem. You assume that the interview that is g

> If someone can pass an interview, this person deserves a chance, no matter the background. Eh... This is the problem. You assume that the interview that is given is a valid judge of competency. Often they are not. They judge whether you've done enough leetcode to see a similar problem to whatever esoteric coding puzzle you're given. OR it shows that you can stand toe to toe (or at least give acceptable answers) to whatever the question de jour is in the "open session". (This may come off as spiteful) I've built web applications in the web 2.0 LAMP/ajax era (as a young kid). I've built modern Java applications from struts to spring. Built microservices in new languages (go, rust, typscript). I've used Linux for going on 20 years (slackware, suse, gentoo, and debian). I've built and maintained modern container based web applications on Kubernetes. Even contributed to open source. These all show competence. None of that matters in the current interview era that we live in. If you can't solve some bs problem in 30 min like a hot and ready pizza, you're passed on. Often, the interviewer couldn't do the question in the time alotted. Or you're badgered about some random "gotcha question" (I was once disqualified for not being able to describe shell tokenization "to standard"... It wasn't a job to replace zsh, bash, or fish.. I'll tell you that). That's not sifting through candidates for competency at all. And frankly... it will show in the quality of the code (should you get "the pleasure" of an offer). Or the architecture of the systems.