Ugh, that's horrifying. I don't think I've been the interviewer and not felt the exact opposite, like "I'm desperate to have more people on the team ASAP; do we satisfice here and make it work or hold out?"

But then I've always been interviewing for my own future colleagues/boss/reports. I guess the dynamics could be different if you're in a huge company and just generically interviewing for new cogs that might get slotted anywhere.

I'm in semiconductor design not software but my goal is always "I've got way too much work, is this person good enough that after a few months of training they will be able to do some of my work so I can get more sleep?"

If the person is smarter than me even better! Instead of spending time teaching them maybe I can learn from them and get into their network so that if I ever need a job in the future they can help me out.

this is very well put, indeed both parties are set up to fail: - the interviewer has an incentive to fail the candidate, whereas the interest of the employer is to actually hire someone eventually.. - the interviewee is rated on something that has little resemblance to the actual job (difficult to succeed when you're not told what the admission criteria are...).