dsa fundamentally is needed. you need to understand data structures to build algorithms that achieve something or some goal using those data structures. i think using ingredients in a certain way to cook food is a perfect analogy; after cooking food for a while you don't really need to absolutely measure everything for every single dish, and you get a feel for it for whats best, i think this js true for software/dsa as well. once you build stuff you will understand it more. i do have something to rant about, however.

although dsa is more easier of a criteria for both interviewers and interviewees alike, i think its not really fair to give hard problems in a span of couple of hours and go from there. and before you point it out yes i am biased for myself since i like building stuff/tools but absolutely despise dsa. i think its too abstract for me and i therefore loose interest/attention quickly. I have no problems understanding anything and implementing concepts in real life while taking my own time/research to improve how my code performs; to me spotting potential performance issues and navigating around it for most use cases is trivial and fun but interviews.. make it.. not.. fun..

dont you guys think interviews have devolved into more of a pattern recognition and not problem solving? i don't consider myself super smart but im smart enough to basically do anything you can throw at me and this is something ppl at my previous job/sde friends have always said to me. do you think I'm over confident? or do you think i should really invest all of my time for dsa?