Can we stop calling it "failing" when a company decides you're not a good fit? If you go on a date and don't get asked for a 2nd, did you fail the date? You're not just what they're looking for right now; not everything has to be a failure.
> for every 1-hour interview where I evaluated if someone knew their data structures, I could have just taught them
I'm sorry, what? He thinks it takes one hour to teach someone data structures? We sure are wasting our time with those multiple college courses and hundreds of textbooks on the subject then. We should just get this guy to spend one hour imparting all necessary knowledge into everyone.
> it’s often said that what’s more important is how you solve the problem, not that you solve the problem, but in practice human biases will work against you if you don’t get close to it working.
Human biases are much more likely to work against you if the interviewers have not spent time trying to come up with a consistent test that they give everyone. Does the author think human bias is absent from non-technical interviews? The less standard your hiring methods are, the more bias you'll have.
> I’ll just keep practicing for interviews until I successfully trick someone into thinking that I know how to code and then secretely become one of the best employees they have ever had.
I don't know who Darren Kopp is, so maybe I'm about to get an army of replies saying he's their coding role model, but this is an article about whether code interviews work or not, and he's basically saying "if they don't hire me, who will definitely become one of the best employees they've ever had, then their coding interview process must suck". The other possibility is that Darren Kopp just isn't actually tremendously more stellar than everyone else and coding interviews are actually kinda working. For his argument to work, he has to be one of the best possible candidates for every job he's applying for. I just kinda doubt that.