4 ms·

They are cargo cutting, I was about to make the same point. I am more likely to get a leetcode quiz from a small company trying to emulate a FAANG company than

They are cargo cutting, I was about to make the same point. I am more likely to get a leetcode quiz from a small company trying to emulate a FAANG company than I am from an interview with an actual FAANG company. Leetcode is part a costly signal given the study that has to be put into it, and part IQ test. I think part of the proliferation of leetcode is due to the illegality (edit: in effect even though not explicitly) of using IQ tests. But if someone could have a certified IQ test they could reuse that one test result for the entire job market improving liquidity. It would be no worse than leetcode as the IQ part of leetcode is in effect already an inefficient and arduous IQ test that people have to take repeatedly. The costly signal was supposed to be university but the academies have sold out their responsibilities. I think the effort to democratize university education, instead of lifting people up, has instead dragged universities down. The reason I think the solution is difficult is that we have to chose between a more fair world where just about anyone can get a degree and IQ tests are illegal but we have to keep taking these leetcode tests. Or a less fair world where an IQ test / SAT score and a university certificate is sufficient.

tptacek 2y ago
It is not illegal to give candidates IQ tests. There are huge firms that do so openly. The practice isn't widespread because it doesn't work well, not because it's proscribed.
- cjbgkagh 2y ago
  Any test that has disparate impact is in effect illegal. Leetcode at least makes this process more opaque which helps limit liability. I have edited my post to note that there is no explicit legislation making IQ tests illegal in the US.
  - tptacek 2y ago
    I don't need to litigate this, but they're not "effectively" illegal either. Again: big firms with huge HR departments and lots to lose use then, and brag about it.
    - cjbgkagh 2y ago
      Those I assume also have big legal departments, for smaller companies such lawsuits can be extinction events. This has been previously discussed in detail on HN 12 years ago; https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2414135 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2414135 I would suggest that times have changed since then and disparate impact lawsuits are now more likely to prevail in 2024 than in 2012, so the in-effect aspect has increased since then. I know quite a few CEOs who confide in me that they would rather give IQ tests but do not because of their concerns over legal consequences. Clearly this is anecdotal but this sentiment does seem to be pervasive and extensive and repeated throughout the internet over a long period of time. It would be helpful if you could list some of these companies that publicly state they give IQ tests. I've only heard about this as a practice at hedge funds and even then it was public knowledge / gossip but not publicly stated. In my brief search for such companies I came across this; https://nypost.com/2022/03/15/silicon-valley-firm-apologizes-after-asking-applicants-for-iq-scores/ https://nypost.com/2022/03/15/silicon-valley-firm-apologizes... which is a company that has now apologized for giving IQ tests and is being warned about the legal consequences for having them.
      - tptacek 2y ago
        This NY Post story is speculative; the VC firm that did this (stupid) hiring thing, of asking people to take a free online IQ test and a Meyers-Briggs personality test(!), got called out on Twitter and backed down, blaming the process on an intern. They weren't sued. I'm not saying you won't get dunked on if you, for instance, Wonderlic-test applicants for your tech company. You will. But I don't think you're going to get sued.
        cjbgkagh 2y ago
        I'm grasping at straws looking for a counter example to my overall assertion, that it is not a great counter example does not undermine my case. I made a genuine good faith effort to find them - you could help me out a lot if you could list these companies that boast publicly about administering IQ tests. That would go a long way to demonstrating that such tests are not in effect illegal. My assertion is that IQ tests are already known to have disparate impact and with laws as they are in effect they are illegal. My next assertion is that aptitude tests will suffer the same fate as IQ test because they too will be shown to have disparate impact for the same reasons. That not all such aptitude tests have been sued already under this law does not make them safe from lawsuits as the burden of proof is on the company using them.
  - projectazorian 2y ago
    > Any test that has disparate impact is in effect illegal Nope, it just has to be shown to be relevant to the requirements of the job. So you call it an "employment skills assessment," make 80% of it indistinguishable from an IQ test, and add some domain-specific questions related to the industry or the position. P&G has done this for a long time, among other companies.
    - cjbgkagh 2y ago
      This has been true for a long time but I would suggest that it's no longer true, or at least less true. Such aptitude tests, the opaque form of IQ tests, are now increasingly and effectively being challenged on the same disparate impact that IQ tests were. Rather recently the NY Teachers aptitude test was demonstrated to have disparate impact resulting in a payout of $1.8B. Perhaps one way to get rid of leetcode would be to demonstrate that it also has a disparate impact. Though I have little hope that what would replace leetcode would be any better, especially since it would have to be even more opaque than leetcode already is.
      - tptacek 2y ago
        The teachers aptitude test involved errors in scoring the test, not a conceptual problem with aptitude testing teachers.
        cjbgkagh 2y ago
        As it appears you are more familiar with the case than I am, it would be helpful if you could point out what those errors are? As best I can tell 'Judge Wood ruled that an older state-certification test, which was intended to measure teachers’ knowledge of the liberal arts and science, was racially discriminatory.' Elsewhere I'm seeing "The court found that Black and Latino teachers clearly passed these tests at lower rates than white teachers. In order to prove that this wasn't illegal, the defendants had to show that the test actually demonstrated what it promised: that teachers who did well on the test would do better in their jobs." It seems to me that the error was using the wrong test and it was the wrong test because it had disparate impact. What it does not appear to be is a case that is not about disparate impact because it instead had errors.
  - jrs235 2y ago
    Nope. Many police departments give IQ tests. Score to high and you can be passed over.
    - cjbgkagh 2y ago
      lol, I guess that’s one way to avoid a disparate impact lawsuit. Perhaps we could fix leetcode tests by only hiring people who fail them.
avmich 2y ago
Can we have similar tests for companies, some formalized employment-worthiness?
- cjbgkagh 2y ago
  I think previous work history is currently most used as a substitute. As in the hiring company assumes the previous companies have acted as a gatekeeper. Given the amount of money involved it would be difficult to maintain a formalization / certification process that would be both trusted and resistant to corruption.
  - avmich 2y ago
    No, I mean just like companies would like to see a sort of IQ test results for applicants, I'd assume applicants would like to see a sort of employment-worthiness test for the companies. Previous work history here could be the history of that particular aspiring company of hiring people and people leaving the company.
    - cjbgkagh 2y ago
      Ah, I see, I think companies being far fewer than people are more able to operate on reputation in a way that would be impractical for general mass of individuals. The companies can and do pay PR to try to influence that reputation, as can individuals, and many high profile individuals do in fact hire PR. Glassdoor is one public source of info, but there is generally quite a lot of gossip around companies. People can reach out to current employees of an company like employers can reach out to previous employers of an individual and I've never had an interview where I was unable to ask the interviewer questions about the company. Perhaps a proxy for a corporate IQ test would be net earning per employee which is often pretty public information.
- carlosjobim 2y ago
  Yes, it would be very possible. In Brazil for example, several million people each year do the national test for public sector jobs, with the test result deciding who gets hired. So it doesn't matter who you're related to, if you have the same hobby as your interviewer, or if the HR person thinks you're cute or not. It's the test and that's it. At least in theory. The military branches world wide also generally hires and promotes on merit and testing. So it's nothing strange.

tptacek 2y ago

It is not illegal to give candidates IQ tests. There are huge firms that do so openly. The practice isn't widespread because it doesn't work well, not because it's proscribed.

cjbgkagh 2y ago
Any test that has disparate impact is in effect illegal. Leetcode at least makes this process more opaque which helps limit liability. I have edited my post to note that there is no explicit legislation making IQ tests illegal in the US.
- tptacek 2y ago
  I don't need to litigate this, but they're not "effectively" illegal either. Again: big firms with huge HR departments and lots to lose use then, and brag about it.
  - cjbgkagh 2y ago
    Those I assume also have big legal departments, for smaller companies such lawsuits can be extinction events. This has been previously discussed in detail on HN 12 years ago; https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2414135 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2414135 I would suggest that times have changed since then and disparate impact lawsuits are now more likely to prevail in 2024 than in 2012, so the in-effect aspect has increased since then. I know quite a few CEOs who confide in me that they would rather give IQ tests but do not because of their concerns over legal consequences. Clearly this is anecdotal but this sentiment does seem to be pervasive and extensive and repeated throughout the internet over a long period of time. It would be helpful if you could list some of these companies that publicly state they give IQ tests. I've only heard about this as a practice at hedge funds and even then it was public knowledge / gossip but not publicly stated. In my brief search for such companies I came across this; https://nypost.com/2022/03/15/silicon-valley-firm-apologizes-after-asking-applicants-for-iq-scores/ https://nypost.com/2022/03/15/silicon-valley-firm-apologizes... which is a company that has now apologized for giving IQ tests and is being warned about the legal consequences for having them.
    - tptacek 2y ago
      This NY Post story is speculative; the VC firm that did this (stupid) hiring thing, of asking people to take a free online IQ test and a Meyers-Briggs personality test(!), got called out on Twitter and backed down, blaming the process on an intern. They weren't sued. I'm not saying you won't get dunked on if you, for instance, Wonderlic-test applicants for your tech company. You will. But I don't think you're going to get sued.
      - cjbgkagh 2y ago
        I'm grasping at straws looking for a counter example to my overall assertion, that it is not a great counter example does not undermine my case. I made a genuine good faith effort to find them - you could help me out a lot if you could list these companies that boast publicly about administering IQ tests. That would go a long way to demonstrating that such tests are not in effect illegal. My assertion is that IQ tests are already known to have disparate impact and with laws as they are in effect they are illegal. My next assertion is that aptitude tests will suffer the same fate as IQ test because they too will be shown to have disparate impact for the same reasons. That not all such aptitude tests have been sued already under this law does not make them safe from lawsuits as the burden of proof is on the company using them.
- projectazorian 2y ago
  > Any test that has disparate impact is in effect illegal Nope, it just has to be shown to be relevant to the requirements of the job. So you call it an "employment skills assessment," make 80% of it indistinguishable from an IQ test, and add some domain-specific questions related to the industry or the position. P&G has done this for a long time, among other companies.
  - cjbgkagh 2y ago
    This has been true for a long time but I would suggest that it's no longer true, or at least less true. Such aptitude tests, the opaque form of IQ tests, are now increasingly and effectively being challenged on the same disparate impact that IQ tests were. Rather recently the NY Teachers aptitude test was demonstrated to have disparate impact resulting in a payout of $1.8B. Perhaps one way to get rid of leetcode would be to demonstrate that it also has a disparate impact. Though I have little hope that what would replace leetcode would be any better, especially since it would have to be even more opaque than leetcode already is.
    - tptacek 2y ago
      The teachers aptitude test involved errors in scoring the test, not a conceptual problem with aptitude testing teachers.
      - cjbgkagh 2y ago
        As it appears you are more familiar with the case than I am, it would be helpful if you could point out what those errors are? As best I can tell 'Judge Wood ruled that an older state-certification test, which was intended to measure teachers’ knowledge of the liberal arts and science, was racially discriminatory.' Elsewhere I'm seeing "The court found that Black and Latino teachers clearly passed these tests at lower rates than white teachers. In order to prove that this wasn't illegal, the defendants had to show that the test actually demonstrated what it promised: that teachers who did well on the test would do better in their jobs." It seems to me that the error was using the wrong test and it was the wrong test because it had disparate impact. What it does not appear to be is a case that is not about disparate impact because it instead had errors.
- jrs235 2y ago
  Nope. Many police departments give IQ tests. Score to high and you can be passed over.
  - cjbgkagh 2y ago
    lol, I guess that’s one way to avoid a disparate impact lawsuit. Perhaps we could fix leetcode tests by only hiring people who fail them.

avmich 2y ago

Can we have similar tests for companies, some formalized employment-worthiness?

cjbgkagh 2y ago
I think previous work history is currently most used as a substitute. As in the hiring company assumes the previous companies have acted as a gatekeeper. Given the amount of money involved it would be difficult to maintain a formalization / certification process that would be both trusted and resistant to corruption.
- avmich 2y ago
  No, I mean just like companies would like to see a sort of IQ test results for applicants, I'd assume applicants would like to see a sort of employment-worthiness test for the companies. Previous work history here could be the history of that particular aspiring company of hiring people and people leaving the company.
  - cjbgkagh 2y ago
    Ah, I see, I think companies being far fewer than people are more able to operate on reputation in a way that would be impractical for general mass of individuals. The companies can and do pay PR to try to influence that reputation, as can individuals, and many high profile individuals do in fact hire PR. Glassdoor is one public source of info, but there is generally quite a lot of gossip around companies. People can reach out to current employees of an company like employers can reach out to previous employers of an individual and I've never had an interview where I was unable to ask the interviewer questions about the company. Perhaps a proxy for a corporate IQ test would be net earning per employee which is often pretty public information.
carlosjobim 2y ago
Yes, it would be very possible. In Brazil for example, several million people each year do the national test for public sector jobs, with the test result deciding who gets hired. So it doesn't matter who you're related to, if you have the same hobby as your interviewer, or if the HR person thinks you're cute or not. It's the test and that's it. At least in theory. The military branches world wide also generally hires and promotes on merit and testing. So it's nothing strange.