'Technologies I'm Unfamiliar With'
Underneath is a Laundry list of today's sexiest technologies.
It's not quite as advanced as your suggestion, but it's pretty effective. It's also a good icebreaker when you have the in person interview.
This is just normal stuff.
I get people hitting me up on Linked In for tech that I outgrew 10 years ago. I can either take them off entirely (making me look very 1 dimensional) or counterbalance that with things I'd love for someone to pay me to learn.
I haven't made any decisions so far so the status continues to remain quo.
This is normal! If the hiring managers will reject CVs that have hobbies and you find them valuable information, what you're experiencing is a culture mismatch. That's effective filtering, before you're saddled with a new job contract. Viewing a job application like school, where you're guaranteed a certain result if you have the right talent and work ethic, is the wrong model and will lead to disappointment. It's fundamentally a relationship, so should be viewed like dating.
If I one day become one of HN's fabled star engineers that can have any job they want, I'd like to write a CV in a markdown text file. That's how I really disseminate information in my working life, not Latex.
[1] Having the proper number of pages is an important signal that you are also proper and well educated, i.e. the correct social class.
The desire to learn and adapt is probably one of the most important thing in Software.
The ability to take a look at oneself and identify blind spots/weaknesses in ones knowledge and skills is also a great indicator this person won't become an "expert beginner".
Personal Information ... 1
Education and Certifications ... 1
Previous Experience ... 1:2
Known Technologies ... 2
Technologies I'm Unfamiliar With ... 2:348
It's part of the filtering process to determine what subset you want to target, but learn something new as often as you can. The bonus I've learned over time is the more paradigms, tools, and technologies I learn and practice configuring and launching sample apps or solving simple challenges with, the more they all start to look and feel the same.
I.e. if you are working on anything that is currently a 'web app' of some sort, then depending on what company you were at, you would either be using one framework or another. So you might write in the "I know technology X" column things like "jQuery, React", because your last job used JQuery, then they grew up and switched to React. In the "I don't know technology Y" column, you write things like "BackboneJS, AngularJS" etc. (the actual lists would be much longer, this is just to take an example). You're still current if you use either Angular or React it just happens that you (or someone at your company) didn't choose one but the other. And then there's the myriad of other frameworks that come and go or that a particular niche of companies might prefer. If you're a web app FE or full stack guy you can still pick any of these up easily enough, so it makes sense to list them for the "pattern matching HR drones" (or computers :)) to get the interview.
If you bring nothing but J2EE 1.4 experience I'm going to assume you've carved out a focused niche. I'll steer the interview towards broad, modern practices and technologies.
If your resume talks about nothing but modern technologies, I'll try to dive deep to be sure you aren't a dilettante with surface knowledge in a ton of things but no deep capabilities where it matters to $company.
In general the best resumes show a balance of deep expertise in foundational tech and exposure to new technologies. A dev might have done Python for a decade but has started poking at Elixir, an ops person knows Linux like the back of their hand before they start talking about Kube, etc.
All I can say: in my experience, the engineers I've hired with deep (but potentially old) experience and with balanced resumes have been better performers and more likely to stick around than those who bounce around tech to tech.
In my experience, it's useful to have a couple 'jack-of-all-trades' types on the team, but you wouldn't want all your engineers to be broad but shallow. I did a stint in the military to pay for college, and something we'd point out was that it was better to have something 'good enough' right now than something perfect a thousand miles away. Breadth of experience is also handy when trying to innovate a novel solution.
But I don't have any better evidence than you. I've never worked anywhere large enough to have that sort of data where we could demonstrate quantitatively that one method works better than another, and of course the metrics are all fairly arbitrary themselves.
Employers tend to want people with the right skills but they seldom allow time to develop those skills.