> If TripleByte is capable of finding candidates who would pass a specific, described process
If you (as a hiring company) can describe your hiring process accurately enough that it's possible to specify it, you don't need recruiting at all. You can just take applications directly. What you're imagining is not related to the problems TripleByte faced.
If your goal is, as TripleByte's was, to find people who can pass a particular company's hiring process, the only way for you to know what that process is like is by experimenting with it empirically.
> you theoretically can omit the whole process because by definition, you know that the candidate is able to pass it.
Once again, you (aleph_minus_one) are describing the goal of "find candidates who are good at the job", not the goal of "find candidates who will pass the hiring process".
> If these plausibility checks make you realize that TripleByte was overselling (or to put it much more directly: are fraudsters)
No, that's just what it looks like to you (the company trying to fill spots). The problem people are attempting to address is that the company's hiring process is unrelated to what the company wants in a candidate. You are the fraudster; TripleByte in this scenario is the scapegoat for the bad job you do at candidate evaluation.