> Interviews should be as close as possible to the work that the candidate would do if they join.
Interviews should give information to both parties about what it would be like if the person joined.
Simulating a typical work task, as this article describes, might give you some of that. Though important to remember that's far from all that's relevant to either party.
A recently fashionable Leetcode hazing, on the other hand, is mostly "anti-pattern". It tells the company whether or not the individual has studied for that ritual specifically, and was willing to submit to it for the approval of this company (or is using this company as practice for the gameable ritual). And it tells the individual nothing except that the company thinks this is a good way to do interviews.
Interviews should give information to both parties about what it would be like if the person joined.
Simulating a typical work task, as this article describes, might give you some of that. Though important to remember that's far from all that's relevant to either party.
A recently fashionable Leetcode hazing, on the other hand, is mostly "anti-pattern". It tells the company whether or not the individual has studied for that ritual specifically, and was willing to submit to it for the approval of this company (or is using this company as practice for the gameable ritual). And it tells the individual nothing except that the company thinks this is a good way to do interviews.