I don’t have to code under interview conditions on a daily basis, but I often have to architect under interview conditions. I’m an IC in a small company but I’m often in meetings where they give me high level business requirements and I’m expected to white board ideas about how to design a system that will meet those needs.

It doesn’t have to be perfect, I don’t have to be completely right, and after going and doing a proof of concept, I might be completely off base or realize there is something so didn’t think about. But I am expected to “pseudo-architect” on the fly.

If you can't write fizzbuzz in a few minutes on a whiteboard, even in pseudocode, then you can't code.

I can't write fizzbuzz in a few minutes on a whiteboard under interview conditions, but I've shipped multiple products over three decades. Several of them are from 50% to 100% code written by me.

The syllogism you're proposing overlooks some human variables.

Interpersonal interaction tends to completely occupy my cognitive capacity, the moreso if the other person is a stranger, or if they are challenging me in some way (such as, for example, posing puzzles and evaluating the quality of my answers). I can't think about logical operations under those conditions. I require peace and detachment from human concerns in order to think that way.

This is, of course, a personal quirk, or, if you prefer, disability, and nobody should have to bear the burden of it but me. But I've been an actual 10X programmer on a shipping product, as verified by DVCS statistics. I submit that as evidence that I can, in fact, code. I just can't do it in interview conditions.

I also can't navigate while interacting with someone. I can drive just fine; I can operate a vehicle safely. I just can't navigate. Everyone in my close family is aware of this limitation. When my daughter was a teenager, she exploited this quirk for laughs. I have to admit, I thought it was pretty funny, too. In particular, I remember a pause in a conversation where I looked around and realized that I was parked at a Safeway in Capitola, California, and had no idea how I got there. My daughter and I both laughed when I realized what had happened.

But if you want me to drive, and you want to reach a specific, predictable destination, you have to leave me alone to navigate.

Similarly, if you want me to be a 10X programmer, or indeed any kind of working programmer, you have to leave me alone to do it.

Maybe I'm not the only one.

I won't argue that you should accommodate me, or people like me. Maybe you don't need us. That's okay. I've found other ways to get by--being hired by people already familiar with my other work, for example, or making my own products. It's maybe a less predictable career path than the usual, but it's worked so far.

But for obvious reasons, I can't agree with your claim.

I can code in interview situations. But I still think it's a waste of time. Ask me about my real work. Tell me about what your challenges are. Let's figure out whether it makes sense to work together.

There's always an exception that proves the rule. I'm sure, though, if you could provide an explanation like this and then provide and walk them through some already-written code examples, that would also be acceptable?

I'd take someone who says "I can't live-code while talking about it, but here's an example of my code and I can explain how it works" over someone who tries to BS me.

Yep, I can do what you suggest, and I've done it before. It can go a little sideways, though, depending on the questions you ask. If your question requires me to do what I can't do in an interview setting, then neither you nor I will be happy with the result.

Don't get me wrong; you as an interviewer are not under any obligation to adapt your hiring process to my quirks.

On the other hand, I'm not under any obligation to participate in a hiring process I don't like, either. I stopped participating in hiring processes I don't like around two decades ago, and I've survived anyway.