tl;dr: if companies know that they are going to miss quality candidates with a code challenge, and are ok with that, it's ok to have one. If candidates are ok with giving some companies the miss because they won't put up with a challenge, that's ok too. And code challenges are good for some types of positions and not others.

I agree that companies are excluding people such as yourself with these coding challenges. That's their right, just as it is your right to not apply to any companies that require such challenges.

If someone is finding good candidates with a coding challenge, that's great. If someone is finding good jobs while avoiding coding challenges, that's great too.

I will say that there's some nuance implied in your comment that simply isn't present in any of the github/coding challenge blog posts that have popped up on HN over the last few days.

Whether a coding challenge is appropriate doesn't just depend on the company or the candidate--it also depends on the position! It's far easier to test junior/mid level skills than senior skills in a 1-2 hour task. Geez, some of the skills you mention above would be hard to test in a 1-2 day task.

When you are looking for esoteric, softer, or more senior skills (requirements gathering, or architecture), you need other ways of evaluating candidates beyond a code challenge. Things like what you suggest: conversations, references, etc. Of course, there are some "senior" folks out there who aren't great coders even though they talk a good game, and if coding is what the position requires, a code challenge is fine.