appreciate the commentary, and largely agree with your points. I agree that the monetisation switchup definitely doesn't help his case on the ethics/morality front.
however, I think labelling this as cheating and applying those value judgements isn't quite representative of "intention".
since he never intended to accept those offers, it doesn't make sense to me to judge him in the same way you would a person who cheated and actually intends to accept those offers.
I believe this is what most people online mean when they say "he's making a statement" - in their minds they don't think of him as a cheater because he never intended to accept those offers. obviously whether we agree with the statement he's making is a different story and I think your commentary is quite well rounded in that aspect.
on the other hand, claiming "he just wanted to make a statement" is also disingenuous given his monetisation switchup and the capitalisation of his virality. to be fair, I think(?) in his posts he was candid about the self interest, and I didn't really get the vibe that he was painting himself as a hero either.
anyway, thanks for the commentary, I especially liked the many circles and the bit about Goodhart's law 🙂
But I do think that in his initial posts (now probably deleted since I can't seem to find them on LinkedIn) he sounded like he genuinely wanted to change the system for the better (or maybe I was just naive to believe that).
Oh, and I agree with you about the point that he's not a "cheater" since he never intended to accept those offers - but he is definitely (and knowingly) *enabling cheating*. I think it's like selling exam answers to other students - while *you* may not be cheating in the exam, you are definitely part of the problem. (It's just a matter of semantics.)
Thanks for reading and sharing your honest thoughts on this! I do think we need more thoughtful conversations around this topic :)
The portfolio of projects are available in YouTube under tutorial videos to clone and mask it as their own projects. The instructors are literally selling it for 100₹. Even the take home assessments can be done by some professional for money.
Leetcode is best to analyse the person’s algorithmic thinking(btw I suck at it but still I support it). I like that how you put the differences for clustered and included index. That is best to analyse candidate experience. But I wonder how the person from any startup would have any knowledge about microservices let alone distributed systems to crack System Design rounds. If they do they are just explaining concepts that they read but not involved.
> "The portfolio of projects are available in YouTube under tutorial videos to clone and mask it as their own projects. The instructors are literally selling it for 100₹. Even the take home assessments can be done by some professional for money."
I think you handled the nuances really well here and I especially love your point on how people would just prep other interview types as they become more popular like explain your project or system design for new grads. Ultimately no test can fully measure what you know but try to get some signals that are hopefully useful.
Companies will also be more pedigree-biased at the resume stage as online interviews become less trustworthy. I already seen this with hiring in India where cheating is much more common
So this equilibrium is worse for the best engineers at non-stop schools. A bummer :(
Yup, I agree. I know of several companies that only hire from the top IITs for this exact reason.
I guess the lesson here is to think about the consequences of saying "we need to change the system" before you've thought about what the new system is going to look like.
appreciate the commentary, and largely agree with your points. I agree that the monetisation switchup definitely doesn't help his case on the ethics/morality front.
however, I think labelling this as cheating and applying those value judgements isn't quite representative of "intention".
since he never intended to accept those offers, it doesn't make sense to me to judge him in the same way you would a person who cheated and actually intends to accept those offers.
I believe this is what most people online mean when they say "he's making a statement" - in their minds they don't think of him as a cheater because he never intended to accept those offers. obviously whether we agree with the statement he's making is a different story and I think your commentary is quite well rounded in that aspect.
on the other hand, claiming "he just wanted to make a statement" is also disingenuous given his monetisation switchup and the capitalisation of his virality. to be fair, I think(?) in his posts he was candid about the self interest, and I didn't really get the vibe that he was painting himself as a hero either.
anyway, thanks for the commentary, I especially liked the many circles and the bit about Goodhart's law 🙂
Mm I guess that's a fair point of view to have.
But I do think that in his initial posts (now probably deleted since I can't seem to find them on LinkedIn) he sounded like he genuinely wanted to change the system for the better (or maybe I was just naive to believe that).
Oh, and I agree with you about the point that he's not a "cheater" since he never intended to accept those offers - but he is definitely (and knowingly) *enabling cheating*. I think it's like selling exam answers to other students - while *you* may not be cheating in the exam, you are definitely part of the problem. (It's just a matter of semantics.)
Thanks for reading and sharing your honest thoughts on this! I do think we need more thoughtful conversations around this topic :)
The portfolio of projects are available in YouTube under tutorial videos to clone and mask it as their own projects. The instructors are literally selling it for 100₹. Even the take home assessments can be done by some professional for money.
Leetcode is best to analyse the person’s algorithmic thinking(btw I suck at it but still I support it). I like that how you put the differences for clustered and included index. That is best to analyse candidate experience. But I wonder how the person from any startup would have any knowledge about microservices let alone distributed systems to crack System Design rounds. If they do they are just explaining concepts that they read but not involved.
> "The portfolio of projects are available in YouTube under tutorial videos to clone and mask it as their own projects. The instructors are literally selling it for 100₹. Even the take home assessments can be done by some professional for money."
HAHA yes, this is precisely my point :)
I think you handled the nuances really well here and I especially love your point on how people would just prep other interview types as they become more popular like explain your project or system design for new grads. Ultimately no test can fully measure what you know but try to get some signals that are hopefully useful.
Yeah, exactly! Thinking about this from a "systems" point of view makes this quite clear
Great summary!
Companies will also be more pedigree-biased at the resume stage as online interviews become less trustworthy. I already seen this with hiring in India where cheating is much more common
So this equilibrium is worse for the best engineers at non-stop schools. A bummer :(
Yup, I agree. I know of several companies that only hire from the top IITs for this exact reason.
I guess the lesson here is to think about the consequences of saying "we need to change the system" before you've thought about what the new system is going to look like.
Crazy write up Bud. Keep up the good work 👏
Thankss!!