To me it is reasonable to presume that a software developer candidate knows the basics of CS: algorithms, data structures and such but for anything that require

To me it is reasonable to presume that a software developer candidate knows the basics of CS: algorithms, data structures and such but for anything that require deeper knowledge I think it should be only asked if it is mandatory for the job. Sure if you want to maintain a certain "prestige" you should maybe use them to limit your applicant pool but in the end if your work is nothing but coding front-end JavaScript it doesn’t matter do you know how to traverse B-trees or not. And if a need somehow arises it is very easily googleable and implementable with good enough CS education. I think what the interviews should be about, and the best that I have been, have involved some basics sure but also one had few “real-life” coding exercises and in another I had a code review about one of my project’s code (which I was surprised by). Nothing tells more about a person than having them to explain what is their passion but if you are only interested in people that can jump through some loops that’s the people you are going get. Maybe in that kind of company that's just how they do things. I’d argue most people can intuitively tell, maybe not why, when a recruitment process feels “right” compared to one that is forced and does nothing but dehumanize you to a walking Wikipedia and ticket-monkey. But maybe in programmers there is also some that seem to like that idea so I’d say it is more of a skill and culture fit than anything else. But in any case the whole process should be based on some structure that actually measures something real. I personally don’t like being reduced to few facts about missing knowledge on a spreadsheet which I could learn in a week or so. It hurts my ego and most of all makes not want to work in the said company in the future so when I’d know those things I won’t be reapplying.