The answer is that google doesn't give a shit about false negatives.
They know they will get enough people applying several times that they can just toss out qualified people all day. Eventually enough get in.
They know they will get enough people applying several times that they can just toss out qualified people all day. Eventually enough get in.
(I actually don't have an axe to grind here - it's certainly not related to any obvious grouping - I just wonder if interview and selection might be so deeply flawed that a the occasional random lottery injection might improve the overall result.)
I also think the criteria are different. i.e. I believe when evaluating the results it’s more strongly biased to avoid false negatives unlike the regular process which is more about avoiding false positives.
Or maybe I just have impostor syndrome, who can say...