Fairly typical, except there isn't a real commitment to letting the candidate know when it will end. Not only are they noncommittal as to when the last interview will be, they vacillate mid-interview as to whether a given interview will be technical or not. This doesn't seem to be the recruiter's fault. I suspect, based on some things I'd seen online, that they use an arbitrary process as a way to fail a candidate on some nebulous, meaningless metric.

For a data company, their interview process seems to be indicative of a poor use of data from my perspective, but I could be missing something here.

I am certain that I passed the technical bar (I was told this), but was a little too honest in the hiring manager (I assume) chat.

It was all very pedestrian. If you need to know the questions to do well, you won't do well.

I suspect I failed at the "what is a weakness of yours?" question, where I just gave honest self-feedback without filtering myself. I expected that they would understand that this was not something that interfered with me operating at a very high level, based on my skill and resume. I suspect they chose to take it as a "red flag" that I didn't adhere to the social compact and go on with the expected, vanilla answer.

If not that, then they looked me up online/social media and probably saw I am not a big fan of law enforcement (one of their main clients) and figured I wouldn't be a good match.