Edit: Added more description
I would say that if you're talking about contributing to OSS solely for the purpose of enhancing your resume, and the "hope of landing an interview from a FAANG/MAANG-level corp", then you should not do it. I'd encourage people to get involved with contributing to OSS only if it serves an end such as fulfilling one's ideological commitment to FOSS, or furthering a project that one has a personal and direct connection to (eg, something you use yourself), or just because you generally want to make the world a better place and believe that contributing to OSS does that.
If you follow this approach, and treat the "resume building" aspect purely as an incidental sidebar, then the worst case is that you do something that you find worthy in and of itself and don't wind up getting that FAANG job. Best case, you both do something worthy AND you get the job.
But if you go into this with an expectation that it's about building your resume and getting a job with a FAANG, if that doesn't happen, you may be left with resentment and bitterness and a feeling that you wasted your time, and come away with a negative bias towards OSS in general. That downside seems like something worth avoiding, IMO.
Edit: and to be clear, when I say it's a change that you want to see made, I mean in software that you actually use.
For example, I often write software that targets Scheme standards like R7RS, of which there are many compilers and interpreters for. I test my software by running it through many compilers. If my software doesn't work on one compiler, I check to see if it is an error in my understanding of the standard, or in the implementation itself. If it is with the implementation, I see if it is a simple enough change to make myself. If it is, I send a patch. If it isn't, I send the maintainer a notice (ie a GitHub issue or an email) with details on the error.
That is to say I don't go searching for things to contribute to. I contribute to things when I run into the boundries of what exists, and when I would like to push those boundries further.
Second, it sucks to see "OSS" be the term used. "FOSS" is bad enough but at least it retained at least some morals. Now that it's just OSS, people like you are completely unaware of Software Freedom, exactly what the corporations wanted.
That is, it has to be a cool open-source project, or at least something that somebody could think is cool. Something unique or different that stands out. Or maybe it is an entry level job and having a github proves you know how to use version control.