The whole rat-in-a-maze interview vibe is creepy and suppressive of true intellect. Solving a maze that the candidate had not studied recently is going to be a trial and error situation unless one gets very lucky with their first try. And if one had studied the maze recently then it's testing for rote learning, not intellect.
I normally ask the interviewing team to allow me to ask an advanced (worthy of PhD thesis) comp sci question for every canned leet code exercise they ask me to do.
They usually say no thank you. Or they say we believe you have the skills (based on the tens of github/youtube links on my resume) and won't test you.
Don't let them get away with one-sided penalty kicks.
I heard that raw foods contain the very enzymes that our body uses to digest them. Like how an apple decays on its own over time. Those enzymes get destroyed during cooking so your body has to use its existing enzymes. Not sure if this is accurate information, so I'm mentioning it in case someone knows more about this subject.
you're saying it was sent to the regulators but it was written as a blog post for popular consumption. I'm countering by saying that whether the regulators are communicated with using a dry, austere style or a theatrical one fit for a blog post should not change the outcome, unless the regulators are culturally biased (toward the dry style) and therefore the sender chose to hit two birds with one stone )both the regulators and blog readers as audience).... that is unless the regulators are culturally biased
Maybe some gov agencies have the kind of culture that is biased toward a dry and austere communication style such as that typically found in papers coming out of regulatory agencies (and ones presented to them), but I assure you it is not a issue of logic; it's an issue of cultural preference. Trying to argue that a certain communication style is more productive in a certain context is again a cultural bias (not of your opinion but of theirs)
Why should the style matter more than the content. If our gov agencies are as sensitive to style of communication as you suggest then I would say they are wasting our tax dollars with their extreme focus on aesthetics and spurious semantics.
I normally ask the interviewing team to allow me to ask an advanced (worthy of PhD thesis) comp sci question for every canned leet code exercise they ask me to do.
They usually say no thank you. Or they say we believe you have the skills (based on the tens of github/youtube links on my resume) and won't test you.
Don't let them get away with one-sided penalty kicks.