> You say "free choice" like companies are just throwing out job offers for free.
Not for free, you still have to honestly work there. You get salary for value you provide.
In general companies set up hiring processes with intention to hire people. (I know this sounds like a heresy to some ears here on HN). They interviews are set up with intention to hire people while but also filter out people who will not be productive. That these processes are frequently badly designed is another matter.
If you are genuinely good -- they want to hire you. Trust me on that.
The issue is that, sadly, unfortunately, a lot of candidates simply can't do the job. And, tragically, they don't even understand how bad they are and they apply to tens if not hundreds of places making them overrepresented in the candidates' pool. Then they come back to HN and complain how badly these processes are designed, completely missing the point.
Somebody will finally hire them, but why does it have to be me? Could I do something to prevent these people from even applying? Could I do something that, if these people apply, they have no hopes of getting the job?
Sure, some good people who would be able to do the job will be collateral damage but guess what, it usually costs much more to hire a bad apple than accidentally not hire a perfectly acceptable candidate.
The length of the process is supposed to discourage these people from even trying. If you only apply to one or two places, couple of hours of interviews is nothing compared to years of work you will spend there, but if your plan is to shotgun the interviews you can't attend ones that require some preparation, multiple rounds of interviews, maybe a trip onsite, etc.
Believe or not, I just changed jobs and I only "applied" to one company and I spent over 24 hours total talking to representatives of the company over multiple sessions.
If you are good at what you are doing, longer interview just gives you more occasions to prove that. And also learn more about the company.
In my experience even with badly designed processes, good developers will still be better at navigating them than bad ones.
Think about it: you attend an entrance exam where you know only 2% candidates will be accepted. Does it matter how difficult the exam is? No it does not, it only matters if you are better than 98% of applicants.