Even if this is true, it's kind of useless since you need some way to decide who to hire. Not saying i think OP has the best method.

I definitely wouldn’t ignore everything they say.

You're splitting hairs. They're a source of negative value. Anyone with any sense doesn't need anything they have to offer.

I beg to differ, this is exactly the opposite of a manhole problem, which I tried to explain, which I clearly failed.

Perhaps you should search them up ;)

Funny how you’re quick to label them

> Unless you're an insecure, narcissistic engineer who feels "smarter" than everyone else or a cargo cult follower of some business fad, there are no magic questions to instantly separate "good" candidates from "bad."

without taking a moment to actually think why these type of interviews exist.

> You discover good engineers by whiteboarding and working on challenging problems together than can possibly turn into real commits. Ego and solving manhole cover problems doesn't delver good commits.

You think everybody got time for that? Maybe in your company you get one or two CVS, but when you have 30 it’s impossible to conduct thorough testing. You optimize for false negatives.