>If you give your job candidates a discrete math problem orders more difficult than the usual ticket, you minimize the risk of hiring someone who can’t do the job.
You're also maximizing the odds they will get bored and feel baited. With all due respect, you could have picked a better example to illustrate your point.
This is exactly why you can't make such bold claims. You're looking at this from one perspective without considering all the variables which go into the workplace equation. So far, the best correlator to job performance is giving people work corresponding to what they will be doing at the work place. For various reasons, this isn't really happening in software development, making people all to eager to grasp at proxies which they swear will do the same thing. Maybe whiteboarding is in line with the day-to-day at FAANGs, but tons of companies ask questions which are not in line with the day-to-day at all. Both vertically and horizontally. It creates dissatisfaction, burnout, bad cultures, sometimes even animosity, as if hiring managers are playing pranks on candidates.
If you're only looking at this from the perspective of "get someone who can do the job", you're going to miss the forest for the trees. As others say, the company is also being interviewed.
