As an employer, I would seriously hope this does become the norm.
If some employers want to implement recruiting processes that require developers to complete tasks that don't reflect real-world development, it makes it that much easier for other employers to differentiate themselves and attract competent developers who aren't interested or desperate enough to play these games.
Frankly, in today's market I feel sorry for any experienced developer who is going to complete a "programming test" in which referencing a website or book other than language documentation is forbidden. I reference websites and books all the time, and I don't know a single developer who doesn't.
This was too awesome a comment to pass up, so I ended up browsing your thread history / googling you. I found a lot of great posts as well as the hilarious https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5967671... but sadly no real name / business name.
What company do you run? Are you in the Bay Area? Can I buy you coffee? I have a feeling you could teach me things that are both true and that hackernews would downvote... And that there's a reasonable chance I could return the favor.
Background so you can filter me more easily: I'm a very good programmer (7 years experience coding on small teams made of up jQuery core, rails core, and MIT AI Lab alums. Several offers from YC companies. 4 papers & patents. Currently doing machine learning for the Scripps Institute of Oceanography). I'm also an avid reader of psychology (cognitive biases mostly), marketing (Joe Sugarman is amazing), and business books (I'm a raging Munger and Deming fan).
So I'm guessing if we did meet for coffee you at least wouldn't find it boring.
Seems like the obvious (if dishonest) thing would be to use a throwaway phone # to get the test, then spend a day or so solving it, then type it in (with plausible delays) using your real number a day later. Assuming the test is roughly the same each time (even if details are different, it's probably of the same general class).
In grading, the results of 6-8h of work entered in 2h would look more impressive than 3h of work in 3h, I suspect.
(Sometimes I hate that whenever someone gives me a situation, my first thought is "how can this be cheated or gamed", followed by "what controls can I put in place to prevent that, and and what costs"; it's basically automatic.)
Credentials through phone # is more of a deterrent. We're also going to have an in-person coding exercise as a next step, which would be much harder to game :)
Why would you want to appear better then you are at the interview? You'll get found out eventually later, and this will end up just spending your time.
There are plenty of developers/programmers who do not ace tests with rigid constraints, but are quite competent in a more relaxed setting.
That is they are not the 1% that the all hirers, but they are maybe top 20% and that is actually what most jobs require no matter the delusions of hiring managers.
Granted this particular job might be an exception but I doubt it.
