tubby12345

easiest way to shortcircuit the process is to reach out to someone through linked in and ask for a referral. if you're really who you claim to be in your profile here then you shouldn't have any trouble getting an interview.

i have no clue what you're saying

>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).

>I just hope I'm not the one that has to maintain it down the road...

i'm good at what i do - my implementations are clean. they got that way (surprise surprise) as a side-effect of me implementing many times.

>least-arbitrary and most accessible ways to jump from one group to the more highly paid one.

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).

>I can assure you, 100% without a doubt, that this is where the vast majority of developers are.

cool? then that majority doesn't generate the same value as those that do and so they shouldn't get paid as such? i already asserted that?

>Including people working on the most cutting edge software.

ctrl+f to doubt that you know what people working on cutting edge software do. i, on the other hand, do have some experience on cutting edge compiler tech and it is absolutely what i've described. sorry not sorry.

>can regurgitate this is because they just re-read their course book yesterday and they expect algorithmic problems.

great. i'm glad. they're prepared for tasks being assigned to them that exercise those skills and by the end of the half they'll have a deep understanding rather than just a wrote understanding. either way i'll hire them over someone that thinks it's worthless being conversant in the algorithm.

what was your point? that it's silly to reinvent the wheel over and over. so i gave you an example of a wheel (two) that often needs to be reinvented.