The logistics of certain hiring practices may be themselves biased in terms of age (or other factors), which is questionably ethical. This trial week seems to discriminate against those who cannot trivially sacrifice vacation time (employees with families, for example). There are others, too; I've heard other founders scheduling interviews with candidates late into the evening or night, even on weekends. With kids to tend to, that would be an incredibly frustrating situation.
Nothing is quite so black and white that these acts are themselves evil, but I do hope companies aren't becoming culturally biased. If you're flexible with your policies, then perhaps you'll do fine. With that said, there's something to be said to sticking to some conventions in the interest of not alienating candidates
Especially when relocating their families, it's actually a positive -- you end up feeling much more comfortable this is a place you will be at for a while before making that commitment.
Also, older programmers (even those who've declined management by choice) threaten the lie on which the VC-funded world stands, which is that being a subordinate engineer (and getting jack-shit equity) at 22 is a sure path to being an exec at 27, a founder at 31, and an investor (either an angel, meaning "rich", or a VC, meaning "given a soft landing") at 35. The brutal career age-grading comes from a need to exclude those who refute the lie of promised progress.