Buddy there are at least 32 free non-sleep hours on the weekend. I think the 9-5 schedule is a ridiculous social phenomenon as well, but if you're saying "I spend more time with my deskmates than my partner during the week", you're working more than a 9-5. If you're using "during the week" to mean on weekdays, this seems like a pretty arbitrary point to make. We live in a capitalist society, most of our social relationships are determined by economics, frankly I think it's fucked up to think you're entitled to be best friends with your coworkers. I'm unhappy that economic decisions beyond my control mediate my personal relationships, but that affects my politics not my decision-making around whether someone is entitled to earn a living alongside me.
> Makes sense to me. Anyone who gets up and walks out of an interview because they were asked what they liked to do for fun is probably not someone you want to waste your time with.
That's not why you ask these questions for one, because you're basically just describing me and mostly no one else. But ask yourself why its important to know what my hobbies are and why I might be reluctant to answer this kind of question when every single little petty bias you have might prevent me from getting a job. Consider the position of power you have in this scenario. This is not a hypothetical either. This will sound like humblebragging, but I had an interview with a digital healthcare company in the bay area once and was told I didn't get the job because I "seemed too interested in CS topics" or something to that effect. Effectively saying they didn't want somebody who was interested in more than hacking javascript (which I did a code interview in and did well I thought). I had an interview where an interviewer was able to learn my politics from a github org I was a member of and didn't get the job (no idea if that affected the decision or not, they wouldn't explain their rationale). This kind of thing is why I don't consider these questions innocuous.