I think the reason leetcode problems are still popular is because they test whether a candidate is willing to work hard (‘grind’) on problems that don’t even matter. A lot like what actually goes on at a FAANG company.
I think the reason leetcode problems are still popular is because they test whether a candidate is willing to work hard (‘grind’) on problems that don’t even matter. A lot like what actually goes on at a FAANG company.
Hard disagree. At FAANG companies, working on problems that "don't matter" is exactly how you get a "Meets Some" or worse at your next perf review. These companies are obsessed with measurable impact - you need to show clear business value, user metrics, or revenue impact. Spend 6 months grinding on irrelevant work and you'll be on a PIP in a blink of an eye
>working on problems that "don't matter"
Usually low level engineers don't have a say on what projects they get to work. They show impact by completing whatever projects were handed to them and hope/pray those projects take off and become visible to upper management and/or tied directly to revenue.
The grind aspect is real though. 99% of FAANG engineers aren't building the next google maps or LLM, they are doing Enterprise CRUD + ELT + jira tickets. Companies like Meta and Amazon have enormous workloads and thus a grinder is preferable.
After a few years of experience, CRUD and ETL can be done while sleepwalking so the only missing component is someone willing to grind, e.g. someone who will spend 100 consecutive days doing leetcode