The most utterly absurd instantiation is the dev that's 100% sure that FAANG is going to fail soon because they're passing on people like him/her that are just so talented that they don't need to prove it with any assessment. There's also the MGTOW-esque subgroup that eschews such interviews and will proclaim it proudly, along with their salary.
Personally I'd be embarrassed if I was making a less than obscene dev salary, which is still upper middle class anywhere in the world, and all the while complaining that I deserve more for no added effort.
What's funny is there are other professions where the same sort of multimodal distribution in compensation exists (big law vs everyone else, competitive specialties vs general practice in medicine, IB and PE vs everyone else in finance) and I have never seen members of those communities complain as much as developers do.
Edit:
I have a friend that's trying to break into FAANG (as a DS) who I've been coaching. He has a stats PhD and basically no software training whatsoever, outside of R. Since DS loops still have LC questions it's been very hard for him. I have never heard him once express feelings of resentment over the process - he fails an interview and just goes back to practicing. He's also a first gen immigrant from a very poor part of the middle east. Admittedly it's hard to assign/attribute his perseverance to any particular thing but naive intuition dictates that some of it must be his humility - something that software as an industry seriously lacks.
That's not even getting into how hilariously unrealistic "trial periods", for instance, are. Why am I going to leave a job for just a trial period without any more thorough attempt to check fit before hand? Why would I invest that much time in side work if I'm doing it before quitting, when I could get a FAANG offer instead for single-digit-days-amount of brushing up?
exactly. i mean like try to apply to IB at a BB and see if anyone even skims your resume without an ivy+ on it. they can't fathom how good they have it because they've never done anything else (which is, of course, what breeds entitlement).
like you don't get it: go here https://www.hudsonrivertrading.com/careers/job/?gh_jid=35621... and find the dropdown for school ("what university are you currently attending").
As someone who mostly agrees with you, I still bemoan the LC grind. This is mostly because I think the software market has grown to the point where there’s a distinct market for “plumbers” vs “engineers”. I consider myself a “plumber” who understands how to piece together various frameworks and languages in the most efficient matter, but “engineer are the one who actually invent the new frameworks and who need to actually understand DSA to accomplish their jobs. It feels like distinct skills since I’ve tackled what I consider engineering problems multiple times and failed but I keep getting rewarded with higher and higher salaries for doing what I consider plumbing.
Unfortunately there seems to be an ego component and no company will admit that they need software “plumbers” more than they need software “engineers” or it makes them/their employees look bad.
I just wish I could be ranked and rewarded off my “plumbing” skills and only ranked on my “engineering” skills if I was looking for a career change
>In real life, the ones who will do so are mostly just the ones who it hurts.
you think people grinding LC that make it through are hurt by the process?
>the insanity that's making them miserable
as far as i can tell, sloth, avarice, and greed are making devs miserable (not some bogeyman called LC).
Other professions have guilds (not called that, but effectively that) who qualify membership and enforce various rules and standards on their members.
Maybe one day we'll have a Guild of Software Developers that provides this service and we won't need to deal with shitty interview tests. But until that day, maybe we shouldn't be comparing ourselves to professions that do have this and therefore don't face the same problems.
The other professions have a "closed shop" - you cannot work in that profession without joining that association.
e.g. in the Anglosphere, you cannot practice as a lawyer without being a member of the relevant Bar Association, and to join that you must "pass the bar" which is an exam.
If we had this in Dev, then we wouldn't be able to write code for money until/unless we were a member of the Software Dev Association, and they wouldn't accept us until/unless we'd passed a rigorous exam (passing the bar is something that takes years of study) to prove that we could code. Then we wouldn't be facing ridiculous "but can you actually code?" tests during interviews.
But creating that closed shop has always failed (so far). Employers don't want it, and new coders don't want it. It's only us old hands who expect to be grandfathered into it that kinda like the idea.