You could argue the reverse. A lot of leetcode questions are/used to be tests you've studied CS, and largely unrelated to day-to-day software dev (e.g. the infamous "invert a binary tree" question).
Therefore, they mainly ensured companies hired people from similar university programs that the test givers also attended.
Knowing how to invert a binary tree is proxy for knowing how to do other none-trivial tasks in your domain of choice. It's so much better than the alternatives for interviews. Which are questions like, obscure trivia, spot-the-bug, how-many-piano-tuners-are-in-chicago, or two-day-long-mini-projects.
Everyone is optimizing for getting the most information in the smallest amount of time. Algorithm questions do that. The interviewee knows that they are going to get algorithm question, and most places tell them ahead of time what the nature of the questions will be. So interviews should be an easy cakewalk that everyone can pass, but they aren't.
I think the point was how can you say Leetcode is rejecting Academic experience when the majority of questions are straight from undergrad DS and Algo courses?
>So interviews should be an easy cakewalk that everyone can pass, but they aren't.
For a person with no CS degree this is definitely not easy and being flippant and saying it is is disingenuous.
It's rejecting academic _credentials_ as a proxy for programming competence. Say what you will about it, Leetcode requires you to demonstrate actual capability, and it's used precisely because a CS degree in and of itself does not accurately signify the presence or absence of that capability.
But it doesn't, it reflects your training in solving DS and Algo problems from undergrad CS curriculum.
I think its almost universally agreed at this point that Algo interviews don't have anything to do with day to day work and don't demonstrate development ability.
As much as I hate leetcode, I think it's imperfect but works. I think the biggest tech companies have rigorously tested it, and come to the conclusion that for mass hiring and removing bias/discrimination from the interview process, it's effective.
Therefore, they mainly ensured companies hired people from similar university programs that the test givers also attended.