It sounds plausible. Guy claims to be working as a programmer, border guard googles "basic programmer interview questions" or similar and asks them to see how the guy reacts. If he is totally lost, the probability that he's lying about his profession increases.
Experienced devs and dev managers (me included) fuck up consistently in recruiting - employing people who "interview well" but drag the team down, or overlooking or excluding great potential team members 'cause they don't perform well "programming a whiteboard" - and now we expect some minimum wage rent-a-bully to accurately assess a "programmer's" skills based on reading wikipedia entries?
I'm _reasonably_ certain my best front end dev probably doesn't even know what a binary search tree is. Same with half of my mobile devs, they probably vaguely recall them from college, but have never used them in 5 or 6 year mobile app dev careers. Should _they_ be denied entry at a border because they can't regurgitate some wikipedia page completely unrelated and mostly irrelevant to their specialisations?
What evidence do you have that the answer "sorry, I've never heard of that; it must not come up much in iPhone development" would get them turned away at the border?
Something being plausible doesn't have any bearing on whether something is true or not.
The pawn shop in my town getting robbed last night sounds plausible. But it didn't get robbed. And we don't even have a pawn shop in my town.
Also, about 50% of the comments in this thread are some how relating this persons supposed treatment by border patrol to Trump. It kind of feels like people will just take any dubious, unsourced(and perhaps unsourecable) claims when they can even tangentially link them to the big bad man they hate, but can't stop thinking about.
