> So, to me at least, your antagonism here is really you wanting to waste resources and/or not validate input. Neither are good signs.
No, I want you to give me properly challenging questions to prove you deserve to be my employer (as I will be doing the hard work to make you a gazillionaire). FizzBuzz tells me you read one article a few years ago, didn't think about it at all (why could that be a problem?), and now give it left and right to anyone that has the bad luck of interviewing with you. You are telling me you are arrogant, prideful and lazy.
That’s the easy stuff. Why waste time on the harder stuff if you can’t do the easy stuff? What does that tell me about your work ethic if you think you are too good to do FizzBuzz you probably also think you are too good to fix an off by one defect we found in production.
How can you be happy to have an off-by-one error in your code? Moreover, how can you come to a conclusion that a person that is not willing to do FizzBuzz would be happy to even ship something with off-by-one error?! Complete non sequitur... Let's wrap up this discussion for today.
No one is happy with bugs but bugs happen. If you aren’t willing to do a FizzBuzz type problem because it is too “simple” you also probably will think being assigned a simple reported defect is beneath you.
You realize you are only reinforcing the use of FizzBuzz as a test. If it gets rid of people like you applying, it's done its job. Wastes less of my time, and ensures I get the better hires. Thanks!
Have you considered that FizzBuzz is a warmup question to see if you're worthy of a properly challenging question?
The interviewer has multiple responsibilities, one of them is candidate experience. If I start with the "challenging" question and the candidate isn't ready, then I learn nothing other than they can't do it and the candidate suffers, completely lost.
But, if I start with a middle-to-low bar question, then I can always get data and easily extend or follow-up the question with something more challenging appropriate to your skill & experience.
Dunno, the first time I went to Google interview I had absolutely brutal one as my first question (a complicated dynamic programming on combinatorial problem without closed form solution), and I absolutely loved it and after some discussion with the interviewer came to a solution in about 20 minutes, all on whiteboards I hate. I am not sure why wouldn't you rather use the time for interview or something more meaningful than to test if somebody can do a programming equivalent of 1+2+3 when you can observe from their CV that they probably aren't complete beginners and you are interviewing to get somebody for a very senior job.
No, I want you to give me properly challenging questions to prove you deserve to be my employer (as I will be doing the hard work to make you a gazillionaire). FizzBuzz tells me you read one article a few years ago, didn't think about it at all (why could that be a problem?), and now give it left and right to anyone that has the bad luck of interviewing with you. You are telling me you are arrogant, prideful and lazy.