And the problem of interviewing in the software industry is the problem of interviewing in the finance industry. Forget being successful (as defined in already having the money to live a life long without begging for food to some corporate masters). 99.9999% of the guys competing for a position not only haven't yet made money (or they wouldn't need that goddamn job), but won't make any successful business in all their life. The problem is competing with losers in a competition whose goal is obviously not to select winners coze there's no such thing there. So what do you turn to instead, well select increasingly coolest ways to ultimately be a loser. There's a saying among (older) software developers: There are two ways of making a software, one is to make it so simple that there obviously are no deficiencies and other is to make it so complicated that there are no obvious deficiencies. Same goes with interviewing and "success" in life. There are two ways of passing an interview or securing a business deal, one is to make it as simple as already requiring you to be successful, case when there obviously are no deficiencies. Or as it happens when you deal with losers and scammers, to make it so complicated that there are no obvious unsuccessful guys that you're hiring or do business with.