These conditions only apply for the 24 minutes in which you take the test. How is this different than if a person were watching you during an interview?
Using such a system in the first place also signals their ineptitude at hiring, or at least an ignorance of quality hiring practices.
>What are you going to do, take a break and load up some porn?
Well, yes:
https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/669103856106668033/UF3c... [NSFW]
Paid homework projects are far superior. Plagiarism checks can be run on the provided solutions, and a follow-up conversation concerning the project at the interview should easily suss out anyone who had a third party to do it for them.
That approach also has the advantage of actually being a relevant to the position—unlike some generalized intelligence test.
Frankly if people are putting up with the test they have now, Amazon could probably get away with issuing unpaid homework projects, however classless that would be.
This will lead to hiring people who can be coached until they sort of understand a solution, although they still couldn't create it.
Every non-perfect solution is worthless?
I've found that the answer to all this is to give a 30-60m remote test (no proctoring), where they get to write the thing as they want, and a 15m discussion where you analyze their solution and assign one new feature then let them walk you through the changes. No code, no whiteboard, just discussion.
A lot of people can't whiteboard code from scratch but can take a piece of code they've just written and discuss next steps. And it's also an actual work skill that many good coders are bad at, so it gives you a good insight into high and low-level people.
If they're collecting this much data already, how much of a stretch do you think it is to obtain your browser history?
It's different because they're recording you, not to mention they're doing it by installing spyware on your computer. That's not what a person does when they watch you, unless they're watching you through a camera.