Big tech companies use LeetCode algorithm tests as a standardized, quantifiable filter to gauge learning potential and problem‑solving skills, even though these tests do not reflect real engineering ability, leading to a paradox where strong algorithm performers may lack practical coding quality and vice versa.
The article compiles several Zhihu responses explaining why many developers dislike interview coding tasks, citing irrelevance to real work, overemphasis on algorithmic puzzles, time waste, mismatch with production priorities, and the perception that such tests favor test‑crackers over truly skilled engineers.
The article explains how developers who produce negative value—by writing unreadable code, resisting new methods, or making harmful decisions—waste countless hours, harm team morale, and how poor hiring practices exacerbate the problem.
A reflective essay explores how a tech professional’s neglect of technical depth, hiring practices, and management details can derail careers, illustrated through personal anecdotes, headhunter experiences, and real‑world examples of directors and VPs struggling without solid technical foundations.
