Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Busting the 10x software engineer myth

swarmia.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 356 posts

Re: Busting the 10x software engineer myth

#201

Post by anchochilis »

dpweb wrote: post #185
bjourne wrote: post #97

This article is pure clickbait written to sell in this stupid Swarmia startup. :) 10x developers exist just like 10x musicians, 10x marathon runners, or 10x chess players exist. It may take a world-class musician a week to write a masterful symphony but it would take me way longer. Perhaps I'd never produce anything great so that musician would be infinitely better at it than me. Great chess players beat amateurs at…

10x is real but I think the more compelling question is how low a bar of competency is allowed to work in the profession - and what is the average level of competency in the programmer market. "Certifications" doesn't get there - too easy to just game a multiple choice test. I would like to see a formal education + testing requirement (ala Doctors, just not 10 years!) Essentially, a barrier of entry for serious progr…

I love it! Artificially constrain the labor supply with licensing. It would be incredibly lucrative for programmers. As a bonus, it would increase the prestige of our profession. Of course it would be a terrible deal for companies and quite bad for the economy.

The fact is that there are many types of applications where a high level of expertise is not needed. Eg. websites for small businesses. The client/end user doesn't care how cleanly architected or efficient or even bug-free the codebase is, and it's a better deal for management to pay some freshly-minted bootcamp grad 50k/yr to hack away than drop 6 times that on a 10xer.

Re: Busting the 10x software engineer myth

#202

Post by notanzaiiswear »

Is this just the IQ debate, or "nature vs nurture", on another playing field?

It seems very obviously that some people operate on another level than others. If methods exist to boost the "normal" people to the genius level, they have not found their way into the mainstream yet.

Surely you could bog them down so that they don't perform better than the rest. You could simply only have boring software issues to solve in your company. In that sense, maybe you could get rid of the 10 times developer.

Or you could hire only very good people. But looking at the sea of developers, it seems clear that some are better than others.

Re: Busting the 10x software engineer myth

#203

Post by rory »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #109

I see a variation on this article, several times a year. I can't speak for other cultures, but the US has a fundamental mindset that all but worships "exceptionalism." We like mavericks, rule-benders, and exceptionally talented individuals. Being attractive, and having a winning [public] persona is also very helpful. Sometimes, good actors can use attractiveness and persona to cover up for a lack of accomplishment an…

> The US would concentrate on high performers, often to the detriment of their peers.

That's very interesting. This is anecdotally very contrary to my experience in middle-class public school, and my sister's experience as a teacher in a lower-income school.

Was the doc shot pre-NCLB? Is it simply a matter of variance across a large country, and my viewpoint is biased?

Re: Busting the 10x software engineer myth

#204

Post by jpgvm »

WalterBright wrote: post #2

I can cite many examples of a 10x engineer having an insight that greatly shortened the development time. It's not that they write code faster. It's that they select a path to the solution that is a lot shorter.

This is finally what allowed me to overcome my own self-doubt.

I'm not the fastest programmer and I don't have the most intellectual horsepower either. What I do have is an enormous body of knowledge built up over many many years that allows me to select the shortest path or atleast guide people smarter than me into the right area of the solution space where it should exist.

Re: Busting the 10x software engineer myth

#205

Post by alberth »

Who would you rather have, a single individual who's a "10x person".

Or another individual who can make all of your developers 5x more productive, because that individual created a framework/algorithm/model that is radically more productive than what existed before (e.g. think Jeff Dean at Google, DHH with Ruby on Rails, etc)?

Re: Busting the 10x software engineer myth

#206

Post by duckmysick »

bjourne wrote: post #97

This article is pure clickbait written to sell in this stupid Swarmia startup. :) 10x developers exist just like 10x musicians, 10x marathon runners, or 10x chess players exist. It may take a world-class musician a week to write a masterful symphony but it would take me way longer. Perhaps I'd never produce anything great so that musician would be infinitely better at it than me. Great chess players beat amateurs at…

> Marathon runners run 42 km in like two hours but it would take me days to finish the same distance...

This doesn't take away the core message of your post. Most marathon races are time limited for logistics reasons - to open streets to traffic. Give or take 6 hours.

Re: Busting the 10x software engineer myth

#207

Post by mmargerum »

samhw wrote: post #183
mmargerum wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem I have is they always want me to train someone as insurance for if I leave. It becomes a self fulfilling prophecy when you make me work and train mediocre people. I just want to build great things and be left alone.

This blog post has some really interesting thoughts on that point: https://applieddivinitystudies.com/2020/10/15/bus-factor/

Yup. this is my life. I have a dev title but im really directing people. I don't enjoy doing both. May as well get paid accordingly.

Re: Busting the 10x software engineer myth

#208

Post by acdha »

coldtea wrote: post #200
acdha wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Even if we knew the case, one can't just e.g. whip 0.4x into 1x, so a 2x remains a very valuable 2/0.4 jump. This is pure speculation, which is why actual data would be useful. Is a measured 0.4x performer that way for innate reasons or is that something which some combination of training and mentoring, better tools, streamlined environments, etc. can help with? — or is the way that's measured even valid? I've seen…

> Is a measured 0.4x performer that way for innate reasons or is that something which some combination of training and mentoring, better tools, streamlined environments, etc. can help with? For this or that individual (as per your example of "a few cases"), maybe. For the majority do you think there will be something that hasn't been tried until now, what with all 2000 methodologies of management, team structure, com…

I think there are plenty of things which make a difference — for example the training and mentoring I mentioned — but the methodology point touches on the problem that they're neither cheap nor easy and most places are unwilling to invest in them. Very few companies which “adopt” something like Agile manage to substantially transform their culture because that's hard and it's a lot easier to make an announcement, do Agilefall, and avoid hard conversations.

Re: Busting the 10x software engineer myth

#209

Post by hnbad »

khalilravanna wrote: post #195

As I get older, and maybe because I worked at a company whose product is “talent optimization”, I think a lot of the “10x” thing is just a function engagement and passion. That is to say it’s not entirely skill or “intelligence”. You could take the best programmer but if you point them at a project they don’t give a crap about they’ll phone it in. Point them at something they’re passionate about and they’ll have absu…

I'd also qualify it by saying that a 10x engineer is not a 10x engineer for long if you burn them out or even if life just happens.

I've met a lot of spunky young college grads/drop-outs who felt like 10x engineers but had no family, no hobbies outside programming and no social life outside meetups, conferences and work.

I've also met people I'd confidently describe as 10x engineers who had all of that but in turn spent far fewer "productive" hours at work than the former.

There's a common misconception that you need to find "young talent" and make them work maximum productive hours (who needs to do chores when you have a work-provided luxury cafeteria and laundry service?) to get the most value out of them like they're top athletes. Well, most top athletes retire before they hit 40. If that's your plan, you're not looking for 10x developers, you're just looking for more meat for the grinder.

Re: Busting the 10x software engineer myth

#210

Post by acdha »

abenga wrote: post #184
acdha wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think your comment inadvertently illustrates how much of this comes down to how you define the baseline. I think the comparison for a world-leading marathon runner shouldn't be someone who _never_ exercises but someone who's actually put some effort into fitness (say, an amateur runner) — yes, they're faster but it's nowhere near 10x[1] — just as our baseline for a 10x developer shouldn't be someone who's never wri…

I think it is probably much, much less harder (as a young, healthy person) to get from relatively unfit to running a marathon in 4:20 compared to getting from that 4:20 to the 2:10 that the elite marathon runners do. It's probably a lot more than 10x harder to go from 4h to 2h, I think. I gained a lot of respect for them when I realized that my gym treadmills' maximum speed (20Kph, which I have never managed to hit f…

That was my experience as a cyclist, too — when I was in my 20s it was relatively straightforward to get my average for a 100mph ride with modest hills into the low 20mph range, while the people in the Tour de France are sustaining greater speeds over mountains. Going from that dedicated amateur level to even the lowest pro tiers requires both significantly more effort and a fair amount of luck in terms of genetics, being able to afford that time, etc.
Post reply on HN