It was too long ago to remember details, but I suppose the interview got as far as "the data link supports 16kbps, the far side doesn't have compression software, but you have to move 10e6 zeros in less than 30 seconds, how?"
for(;;){}
That is a horrible question that tells more about him then the interviewee.
It would lead to lots of enlightening discussion.
I also had great success hiring for IT ops by telling the person, "we use some systems you are not familiar with here, so I'm going to spend the next 10 minutes teaching you the system, and then we'll discuss how you'd diagnose it when you get your first page about it". This tests their ability to learn something new, to engage with an unfamiliar situation, but in the context of mentorship. The only problem with such an intimate technique is that when someone bombs it, they really really bomb it: There's just no hiding what's happening, as it's happening.
It is a profoundly shit question, setting up candidates for randomly failing.
I went the opposite way. I got sick of adversarial interviews. (If you can do the job we’re on the same side. If you can’t you’ll be miserable here so we’re still on the same side). I started opening my interviews with “what did you have for breakfast?” To set the tone of at least everyone can answer the first question. The last guy I hired sheepishly said “I skipped breakfast” but I still counted it a pass.