I love how people in this thread are ABSOLUTELY BAFFLED at "how do we do this a better way." How about the same way doctors, lawyers, and literally everyone else does it? Look at credentials, schooling, past experience, references and personality interviews rather than 99% leetcode? I have lawyer, doctor, etc friends (aka high up professionals who get paid what we do or more) and they think it's absolute insanity what SOFTWARE engineers have to do to get a freaking job. They think it's asinine, quite frankly and all go "well what did you even go to school for? Don't they know you worked at a Fortune 500 company for over a decade? Why are they having you do trick questions from CS101 courses?"
Y'all, it's not that difficult. You can just pretend we're like everyone else because gasp our profession simply isn't that special like we all think it is for some stupid reason.
This doesn't work when there are terrible devs somehow stealing paychecks from big companies for years, not even mentioning interview fraud. I've interviewed credentialed people who can't write fizzbuzz. Until tenure and credentials indicate skill, they can't be used!
Some companies I think do indicate skill, like a L5 at Google can do fizzbuzz I'm sure, but somewhere like Cisco or random small startup might as well be nowhere. As for education, no CS program in the country is a guarantee.
This is such a tired canard. Do these people exist? Yes. Assuming you can hold an in depth, detailed technical conversation with them I'd contend the percentage of these people is astonishingly low. We spend way too much mental energy defending against them.
The real problem is not enough interviewers can discuss in depth technical bits themselves, and thus they can't get signal when talking to a candidate.
Y'all, it's not that difficult. You can just pretend we're like everyone else because gasp our profession simply isn't that special like we all think it is for some stupid reason.