The same could be said about a lot of things, like being able to write a functional solution to a leet code puzzle on a black board in front of an audience.

IMHO, an effective interview process should attempt to mimic the position for which a person is applying. Making a candidate jump through hoops is a bit disrespectful.

IMO the interview process should help the employer correctly identify qualified candidates. Respect for the candidates is important but some candidates should absolutely be prepared to jump through hoops.

Jumping through hoops isn't the only way to demonstrate professional skill. I am the lion tamer, not the lion.

> If you're an ineffective communicator, there's a good chance your comprehension skills are also deficient.

We are quickly moving into a world where most communications are at best assisted by AI and more often have little human input at all. There’s nothing inherently “wrong” about that (we all have opinions there), but “natural” (quotes to emphasize that they’re taught and not natural anyway) communication skills are going to be less and less common as time marches on, much like handwriting, typewriting, calligraphy, etc.

One of the oldest computing principles is "garbage in, garbage out". The person with better native communication skills and AI will still outshine the one that does not with AI because the best AI in the world isn't going to recover signal when there is only noise.

Agreed for native skills, yes.