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

1x Programming

tim.mcnamara.nz

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 217 posts

Re: 1x Programming

#51

Post by BlargMcLarg »

JimBlackwood wrote: post #45
angarg12 wrote: post #25

I praise 1x programmers, but for reasons that might go against the grain in HN. I'm from Spain so our working ethic is different from the Anglo-Saxon world. "Work to live, don't live to work" as the saying goes. My principles for a 1x programmer: * Work is a means to an end. A job should support the lifestyle you want to achieve, not be an end on itself. * 9-to-5 is a perfectly reasonable schedule. Fiercely protects…

I mostly agree with this list, I’d just like to add a caveat that working on a side-project can be a hobby! I have some DnD-related campaign ideas that won’t work in DnD, so I’m trying my hand at making them a pixelart game. Definitely a hobby and creative outlet! OTOH, I’m also trying to write a database implementation in modern C++. While fun, it also mostly serves as a “look me smart” for future job applications b…

I think GP points more towards working on side projects for the sole sake of showing off over anything else, which is a particularly insidious part of "hustle culture" being normalized by a lot of "top tech advice". Especially among the younger crowd, where the market is far harsher on jobseekers and almost everyone is met with skepticism unless what they worked on almost perfectly matches what the company is already doing.

Re: 1x Programming

#52

Post by lawn »

cracrecry wrote: post #43
angarg12 wrote: post #25

I praise 1x programmers, but for reasons that might go against the grain in HN. I'm from Spain so our working ethic is different from the Anglo-Saxon world. "Work to live, don't live to work" as the saying goes. My principles for a 1x programmer: * Work is a means to an end. A job should support the lifestyle you want to achieve, not be an end on itself. * 9-to-5 is a perfectly reasonable schedule. Fiercely protects…

The principle behind being a 10x programmer is not working more, but working less and using tools that multiply you. The 10x dominates the tools ( and techniques and people and capital) that multiply her. If you have a car you can easily and consistently go 10x faster that walking pace. The same applies for your job. Working on a given company, with access to capital and people and tools can multiply you.

But to become a 10x programmer I think you need to put in more effort than if you "only" do your job.

Re: 1x Programming

#53

Post by parentheses »

I feel articles like this make not working hard seem like hard work. The sacrifices made to achieve in one’s career are mostly intentional ones. The flaw of thinking there is more often about the unrealistic expectations of the outcomes.

Saying “it’s ok to not achieve big” is akin to staying “it’s ok to be normal” which is the definition of normal as far as humans are concerned.

Re: 1x Programming

#54

Post by parentheses »

dsr_ wrote: post #28

In Peopleware, DeMarco and Lister write: Count on the best people outperforming the worst by about 10:1. Count on the best performer being about 2.5 times better than the median performer. Count on the half that are better-than-median performers outdoing the other half by more than 2:1. What nearly everyone who has read that remembers is the following: The best people outperform the average by 10x. Spot a difference?

Based on this a median programmer is a 4x engineer

Re: 1x Programming

#55

Post by mirceal »

dsr_ wrote: post #28

In Peopleware, DeMarco and Lister write: Count on the best people outperforming the worst by about 10:1. Count on the best performer being about 2.5 times better than the median performer. Count on the half that are better-than-median performers outdoing the other half by more than 2:1. What nearly everyone who has read that remembers is the following: The best people outperform the average by 10x. Spot a difference?

this aligns with the hypothesis that some people have that a handful of people do most of the work (and the others are the "worst" performers").

What this misses, is that in any highly functioning teams everyone is important and in order for the "rockstar" to be the "rockstar" they need people to help keep the machines running and to support them. This is usually why a team that has a mix of both veterans and newbies works so well. Everyone can operate at their own level while learning and growing. Is the veteran a 10x when compared to a newbie? If you make up some metrics, maybe, but the veteran cannot do meaningful work without the newbs (think rock concert without all the supporting crew. could any band do their own concerts without all the supporting crew?)

Re: 1x Programming

#56

Post by ratww »

angarg12 wrote: post #25

I praise 1x programmers, but for reasons that might go against the grain in HN. I'm from Spain so our working ethic is different from the Anglo-Saxon world. "Work to live, don't live to work" as the saying goes. My principles for a 1x programmer: * Work is a means to an end. A job should support the lifestyle you want to achieve, not be an end on itself. * 9-to-5 is a perfectly reasonable schedule. Fiercely protects…

I agree that this work ethic is indeed healthier and with most of the list, but I want to make one caveat: a programmer working secretly after hours to deliver more is not really a 10x programmer, he's just someone doing unpaid overtime (and risking burnout). Truly 10x developers also only work 9-to-5, the same as 1x.

I also disagree that continuously improving is unnecessary. It absolutely should IMO. But it should happen between 9-to-5, in the workplace.

Re: 1x Programming

#57

Post by mirceal »

gernb wrote: post #41

Something that came up recenty for me. I took a job at FAANG company and my productivity from my POV sucks! I doubt I've written more than 2k lines of code in 9 months! I'm debugging hardware/driver issues in a giant code base (~250k files) that I don't know and APIs I've not used before. Conversely, in my own hobby code I wrote ~2k lines in the last 10 days. It makes me wonder how often 10x is about circumstance vs…

the number of lines you write is almost irrelevant. People need to put the equal sign between lines of code written and productivity. Some of the most awesome and productive people I've worked with actually removed more code than they wrote. Code is a liability. There is no code like no code. Focus on the problem not the number of lines of code

Re: 1x Programming

#58

Post by ratww »

lawn wrote: post #52
cracrecry wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The principle behind being a 10x programmer is not working more, but working less and using tools that multiply you. The 10x dominates the tools ( and techniques and people and capital) that multiply her. If you have a car you can easily and consistently go 10x faster that walking pace. The same applies for your job. Working on a given company, with access to capital and people and tools can multiply you.

But to become a 10x programmer I think you need to put in more effort than if you "only" do your job.

Sure, but putting more effort doesn't necessarily means working more hours. "Work smarter not harder" also applies to improving and applying yourself.

Re: 1x Programming

#59

Post by ipaddr »

phendrenad2 wrote: post #20

I've never met a 10x engineer. (Does that make me the 10x engineer? I doubt it). Personally I believe that the myth of the 10x engineer comes from the very real and very visible fact that often times, one engineer will be 10x as productive as someone sitting in the next desk over. Why is this? There are numerous factors, and certainly innate skill and programming practice come into play. But I think that only gets yo…

Remember it's 10 times better than the worst not average programmer. On average a 10x would be 2.5 better than average. If you think you are average or slightly above average a 10x programmer would look like a 2x to you.

Re: 1x Programming

#60

Post by [deleted] »

parentheses wrote: post #54
dsr_ wrote: post #28

In Peopleware, DeMarco and Lister write: Count on the best people outperforming the worst by about 10:1. Count on the best performer being about 2.5 times better than the median performer. Count on the half that are better-than-median performers outdoing the other half by more than 2:1. What nearly everyone who has read that remembers is the following: The best people outperform the average by 10x. Spot a difference?

Based on this a median programmer is a 4x engineer

[deleted]
Post reply on HN