I feel like we, SWEs, have been over-engineering our interview process. Maybe it's time to simplify it, for example, just ask questions based on the candidate's resume instead of coming up with random challenges. I feel like all the new proposals seem overly complicated, and nobody, interviewer or interviewee, is happy with any of them.

Definitely over-engineering. But I also think the industry is just extremely bad at hiring anything above junior or entry-level. Job postings are so generic and interchangeable between companies that they don't actually tell you what the role is or what the company is looking for. Everyone wants to cast the widest possible net so that they catch some wunderkind genius out of thousands. Then, they wonder why they can't find the exact person they're looking for to solve the problem they're filling the role for.

In reality, job postings should be incredibly specific, with specificity rising as the role requires more experience and problem solving. You'll get less applicants (or will be able to clearly screen out the people who don't meet the specific requirements) but you'll get ones that actually match what you are looking for and can actually solve the problem your company is trying to solve with filling the role. Then the conversation/interview is much more important and both sides feel like they have some "stakes in the game".

This risks hiring candidates who can present themselves and their past projects very well but fail to actually write code and ship anything on the job. I've seen it happen.

You would be very amazed at how many people with reasonably strong resumes can't write _any_ code. Google for fizzbuz, it's a dumb problem, but candidates often can't solve similar problems with a _take_home_ interview.