It isn't trivia. You can "get things done" a lot faster when you don't have to A) google all week for the answer or B) try out multiple half-baked implementations.

I don't have an issue with Gooogle's requirement to know what you are doing, but unfortunately I think the interesting jobs at Google are becoming few and far between.

I feel like there is a focus on what I would call trivial details built into the assumption that a good candidate should be able to explain how all of these things work in an interview. There's a huge difference between not knowing why you might want to keep a binary tree balanced and not knowing how red/black trees work off the top of your head. If you've heard of them and know what they're good for, you can look them up in a few seconds when you need them.

Of course, a talented hacker will know the details of some data structures and algorithms. I'd be far more impressed with a candidate who could tell me in detail about recent uses of a couple more unusual data structures and algorithms than with a candidate who knew all the classics in detail but nothing unusual.