[vitus]

The problem is that a bad hire is really expensive to correct, and so traditionally Google's hiring process has erred on the side of being overly conservative. We've rejected some excellent engineers (or driven them away with the process overhead / delays) to instead pick up people who grinded leetcode for weeks on end or got lucky with an easy interview slate.

Unfortunately, it's really hard to quantify exactly what's broken about the interview process in a way that justifies (to the appropriate individuals!) upending the status quo. You and I can both complain about how this is terrible for candidate experience and for hiring the best talent, but that's not going to change anything.