These tests and questions are often in place so people feel they can manage the risk/uncertainty of hiring. Some studies show that previous performance is the key indicator of future performance. Interviewing and testing in the hiring process are negligible at best.
The costs listed in the article seem to be the result of random sampling without any price-consciousness, i.e. you can easily end up spending that much or more, but you don't have to. I spend much less, but I always compare prices (especially for food, I check the unit price per kg or liter) and take the cheapest option within a given category.
The contrast in the speed and level of disruption between SE (120 workers) and the DE (workforce of 11,000) is super interesting. Power of public policy, compliance and network effect wrapped up in an IRL use case.
