Maybe some people should just give up

The Current Tech Job Market and the Creator's Role [00:22]

• The creator acknowledges the difficulty of the current tech job market, especially for entry-level candidates.
• They reflect on their six years of creating LeetCode videos, noting that while helpful, it might have inadvertently raised the interview bar.
• The focus of the videos has always been on the thought process and mathematical reasoning rather than just rote algorithms.
• This approach, the creator believes, was key to their success at Google, where everyone starts with a similar learning curve.

"And I also want to say that of course we all know that the current job market for anybody in tech is pretty difficult, especially if you're entry level. So, I'm definitely not denying that."

The Perceived Decline in Learning Habits [02:22]

• The creator observes a recent shift, questioning if it's due to the younger generation or "TikTok brain."
• They feel their videos might not be having the intended positive effect.
• An example is given of an easy LeetCode video where the creator suggested practicing harder problems if proficient, or focusing on structured learning if not.
• This led to a comment where a user stated they watch LeetCode videos for entertainment, which the creator found problematic, arguing that passive viewing does not lead to learning.

The "Entertainment" Argument and Over-Reliance on Videos [03:40]

• The creator dismisses the idea of watching LeetCode for entertainment as a weak argument, believing that true learning is not happening.
• They highlight having made over 800 LeetCode videos, available on YouTube and their site, NeatCode.io.
• The creator suggests that after watching hundreds of videos, individuals should be able to solve problems independently without relying on video solutions.
• They question how people succeeded before the era of readily available LeetCode videos and AI tools like ChatGPT.

"And I'm telling you that because even though I make videos, I'm telling you at some point you don't need to rely on videos anymore."

The Triggering Comment and Lack of Fundamental Understanding [05:53]

• The creator recounts another frustrating comment received on a video explaining a greedy algorithm with simple math involving remainders of one or two.
• The comment questioned why the explanation didn't consider the sum of three numbers having a remainder of one, and why it wasn't possible to have three numbers summing to a remainder of one that would be smaller than other combinations.
• While acknowledging that asking questions is good, the creator is dismayed that the commenter didn't spend a minute to do the math themselves.
• This incident fuels the creator's broader concern about laziness and a lack of fundamental mathematical and logical reasoning.

"So the fact that somebody had this question is actually a good thing. But the reason but the fact they took the time the time the one minute or so that it takes to type this question rather than just grabbing a piece of pen and paper and just doing the math themselves. I just can't take that."

Broader Societal Trends: Grade Inflation and Devalued Degrees [08:29]

• The creator speculates that this trend might be linked to grade inflation in schools, which has been ongoing for a long time.
• They state that college degrees are often meaningless now, contrasting it with past eras where degree holders were demonstrably smarter.
• This is supported by the assertion that grade inflation is a verifiable phenomenon.

The "Actuary" Anecdote and the Attitude Towards Effort [10:54]

• The creator shares an anecdote about a Reddit post suggesting aspiring tech professionals consider becoming actuaries due to their low unemployment rates and focus on math and statistics.
• Comments on the post revealed an attitude of complaining about the difficulty of CS jobs while simultaneously viewing other fields with required exams (like actuaries) as "too hard."
• The creator criticizes this perspective, stating that every job requires effort and that this attitude reflects a disconnect from reality.

"Well, that that's just a really hard field to get into. And CS is popular because it's easier. Even though everybody's complaining about how how hard it is to get a CS job, which is fair, right? There is a lot of competition."

Jonathan Blow's Take on Entry-Level Expectations [13:56]

• The creator references a tweet by Jonathan Blow, who is described as smart but sometimes elitist, addressing the expectation that companies should hire and train entry-level people without them having done significant preparatory work.
• Blow's stance is that candidates must cover "most of the distance himself before he's in the territory where the company even can train him meaningfully."
• This reflects a general attitude the creator observes: a demand for spoon-fed explanations rather than independent problem-solving.

The Misconceptions of Entry-Level Job Seekers [15:22]

• The creator agrees with Blow's blunt assessment, stating that many entry-level candidates have misconceptions about what they are trying to achieve.
• They note a lack of initiative, with some individuals not liking or even hating coding, yet still seeking jobs.
• Many learn through random tutorials, try to fill resumes, and expect to be told exactly what to do, lacking original thoughts and assuming that getting the job means constant hand-holding.
• The creator asserts that hitting roadblocks and figuring out solutions is an inevitable part of development, not something that is avoided.

"Most really don't want to take the initiative. They might not like coding or they even hate it, which is fine. Like you don't have to love coding to do this job, but you have to at least take the initiative."

The Core Mathematical Explanation and Self-Correction [17:41]

• The creator returns to the specific mathematical problem that triggered the frustrating comment.
• They explain that any total number X mod 3 can have remainders of 0, 1, or 2.
• The goal is to remove remainders of 1 or 2 to make the number divisible by 3, while maximizing the number.
• To remove a remainder of 1, the smallest number with a remainder of 1 is removed.
• To remove a remainder of 2, the smallest number with a remainder of 2 is removed.
• The creator then illustrates with an example: if numbers with remainder 1 are 7, and numbers with remainder 2 are 2 and 2. To remove a remainder of 1, you'd remove the smallest remainder 1 (7) or two smallest remainder 2s (2+2=4, remainder 1). The latter is smaller.
• The problematic comment asked why the case of three numbers summing to a remainder of one wasn't considered. The creator explains this case (e.g., 1+1+1 or 2+2+2 result in remainder 0; 2+1+1 results in remainder 1) and clarifies that these combinations are always larger than the smallest single number with a remainder of 1 or the two smallest numbers with a remainder of 2.
• The creator concludes that this is basic math and a question that answers itself with minimal effort.

"So, you have some total number. Let's call it X. If you mod it by three, there's three different cases. Either the remainder could be zero, one, or two."

The Creator's Reflection and the Concept of "Fishing" [24:08]

• The creator questions whether they have truly "taught people how to fish" or just given them "fish," implying they may have enabled dependency.
• This possibility is identified as the likely reason for their personal frustration and the video's provocative nature.
• The fundamental explanation for the math problem boils down to finding the smallest number with a remainder of one to remove, or the two smallest numbers with a remainder of two to remove, as any other combination would be larger.
• This is presented as common sense, highlighting the effort individuals are unwilling to exert.

"And that's what nobody does anymore. And so now I have to ask myself, did I ever even teach anybody how to fish? Maybe I didn't. Maybe I just gave a bunch of people fishes and when when they run out of those fish, they're just going to starve to death."