Forget for a minute who won't get through the "broken tech interviews" and instead consider the types of bad hires that could get through these filters:

- Take-home LeetCode: poor communication skills, bad at workflows, unpleasant personality, poor architecture, write-only, cheaters.

- Live LeetCode: same as take-home LeetCode but at least they have communication skills and aren't cheating so you know they can write efficient functions.

- Resume: all the issues with take-home LeetCode.

- Culture fit/behavioral: all the issues of take-home LeetCode, but at least they're good at communication and have a good personality.

- Take-home project: same as take-home Leetcode but instead of efficient functions you know they can at least architect and implement a small, standard application (if they didn't cheat).

- Show me your side project: Same as take-home project, plus they might work extremely slowly, and might only be passionate about that one side project, but you know they have communication skills.

- Architecture whiteboarding: can't actually code to implement the systems they're drawing, but you know they have communication skills.

So it's no surprise that companies wanting to reduce the risk of a costly bad hire (a bad fit, not necessarily a bad person) evaluate the candidate from different angles to check for red flags.

I sympathize with the frustration of those who present false negatives and are filtered out despite actually being a good fit, for example working parents who can't spend a whole weekend polishing a take-home project.