Sure. I know what a list, a hash table, a tree are because I looked it up whenever I saw someone mention it, and eventually internalized it.<p>But before that, I&#x27;d used them for 10-15 years without knowing the name because it doesn&#x27;t matter. Take a hash table. Python calls it a dict. C++ calls it an (unordered) map. Java calls it.. whatever it calls it. It&#x27;s nice to have that &#x27;hash table&#x27; google term to find the thing you want in a new language, but otherwise they&#x27;re just words.<p>Actually in usage I type {} in Python and it is what it is.<p>I&#x27;m not arguing that these things aren&#x27;t useful at all.<p>I&#x27;m arguing that the distinction between the CS-ified person that has spent the effort to learn what the words mean to pass interviews is not substantially more knowledgeable or useful than the version of that person that will have to find it out in the future. It&#x27;s marginal.<p>Basically it feels like a sort of &#x27;table manners&#x27; test. You&#x27;ve put the fork on the wrong side of the plate, so you can&#x27;t eat dinner with us today, you scoundrel.<p>Don&#x27;t take this to mean that I think that computer science is useless. Far, far from it. It is simply that I think that relying on jargon is testing whether someone genuinely has a CS degree (or equivalent without certification). It&#x27;s not testing whether someone is a good programmer.<p>If that&#x27;s what you want, just ask for it. Let&#x27;s not waste each other&#x27;s time and money.<p>The anger here exists because people want good faith interviewing, and instead they get &quot;bloody hell the last 20 people were crap I can&#x27;t be bothered any more&quot; interviewing.