Live data from Hacker News

How to be a -10x Engineer

taylor.town

411–420 of 514 posts

Re: How to be a -10x Engineer

#411

> Ask your team to perform tasks that resemble work. Common examples include presentations, diagrams, and ticket management. I'm as salty as the next guy, but in my experience it has been the sub-par employees who are the ones that don't do this. Ticket management is not busy work, it's a necessity for everyone to keep updated. Presentations and diagrams are tools to communicate. I can safely say that by far the most…

But at what point does that communication cost more than just hiring somebody else who needs less hand holding and less "communication" to understand what is going on and figure out what to next.

I say this because there always seems to be those who don't need this. And it's the ones who need this who never seem to produce as much or are able to solve the problems on their own.

So I ask. If you could hire people who need this "communication" or hire people who don't need the "communication" and they both can get the job done, why would you hire those that require time consuming processes.

Good teams don't need Jira, good teams don't need power points, good teams don't need all the hand holding. These are tools to include those who can't and often bring minimal usefulness to the table.

Poor communication is code for "I have no clue what I am doing and am going to blame others for why I am not useful, but I don't want to admit to others I have no clue what I am doing.". Next time you find your self thinking somebody is poorly communicating, try this in stead. Say "Hey, I don't know what I am doing, I am lost, where can I start? More often than not this "poor communicator" is going to be able to direct you to a task that will not only make you useful, but also not require much more than 5 minutes of exchange and as a result you will probably learn something that will make you more useful in the long run.

> in my experience it has been the sub-par employees who are the ones that don't do this.

To directly call this out, the sub-par are often the ones doing all this stuff, because they simply can't do the actual work. Sub-par is probably not fair, as a good manager will build a team with a few of these folks to tend the toil. So they are useful in a way.

Also you all can think back on the time that you hired somebody and they knew more than just about everybody about how the product works and should work within just a few weeks. This person clearly did not need the documentation, they simply read the code -- the code is the documentation -- and the quicker folks stop thinking like tis anything else other than a big manual the faster they will be able to learn new code bases and become useful. The constant translation between weird human social ideas of what is good communication and a solid structured communication such as code its an incredible waste of time.

Just remember, your job is to write code to tell a computer what to do, and if you can't also read that code to figure out what the program should do, you might be computer illiterate which makes you less valuable than somebody who can both write and read code in the same manner as the systems that will consume it.

If you have ever had somebody tell you "it's like you compile the code in your head" you will know what I am talking about.

Re: How to be a -10x Engineer

#412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah that was an interesting read. I like the concept of a -10x engineer because they definitely exist (in my mind it is someone whose work moves you farther away from the project goals, rather than closer to them). But a lot of the bullets sounded like stuff bad managers do, not bad engineers. Off the top of my head these are the most common two "negative engineer" behaviors I have seen 1) Biggest one: an engineer w…

>Yeah that was an interesting read. I like the concept of a -10x engineer because they definitely exist I don't believe 10x engineers actually exist. Maybe 1.5x, 2x, or 3x engineers exist at most. 10x is a huge exaggeration of human capability. Get this, say a project takes a year to complete. The concept is saying a 10x engineer can do this in about month. If such a person exists it will be so rare I estimate that m…

> You also might get a lead who can ramp up the effectiveness of an entire team by say 3x at most. If the size of the team was N, then it's N*3X. If N is like 4 then it's a 12x increase. This is the closest thing to an actual 10x engineer. But it's not actually a 10x engineer here it's just better management.

All of that are arbitrary numbers. 10 is arbitrary and not actually measurable, but your 3, 4 are as well.

But I think you're on the right track with this thinking. "10x engineer" does not make things 10 times as fast as "1x" engineer does, they do qualitatively different things

Take an example of an engineer who sees through the bullshit of a "cloud architect" who specifies a complicated architecture with novel technologies to pad his resume. Cutting down on this can easily save the project / deliver much faster.

This is kind of an interesting view - 10x engineer does not make projects run 10x faster, but they prevent mistakes which would slow down the project by factor of 10.

Re: How to be a -10x Engineer

#414

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with most of the author’s points, but the post is overly negative in my opinion. It’s blaming other people for the problems instead of digging into why these problems come up in the first place. Why do managers waste time with busywork? They need insight into the process. If you look to criticize without understanding you’ll always find plenty of material to blog about, but you’ll just create new problems and…

> The author probably thinks these issues are caused by bad people instead of bad processes Author here. This is an excellent way to phrase a subtle point that I couldn't figure out how to fit in the piece. I think that -10x engineering is not someone you are, but something you do. And even more commonly, it's something that organizations do for periods of time.

I think this is something that would've been great to include as an intro, and would've completely removed the negative atmosphere that some people (including myself) got from the article.

Re: How to be a -10x Engineer

#415
post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I took over leadership of a project where the previous CTO was a "code should be self documenting" proponent and enforced a comment limit with a precommit hook. I think I made some of the developers cry when I asked why there were so few comments.

even worse, I worked on a project where you were not allowed to have comments in code, but if you really felt a need to explain something, you could put it in the projects readme.md, referencing the file and line number and why you did what you did. Talk about a bone-headed outcome of claiming 'we don't allow comments in our code' mentality.

OMG. I fell afoul of commenting AND coding "standards" when I used Duff's device in an embedded system and my comment was something like.

/* Using Duff's device see for speed and code size */

The poor developer assigned to replace it with "better code" had an impossible task because they couldn't find anything to replace it that wasn't either much slower or much bigger.

Re: How to be a -10x Engineer

#416

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uugggghhh… “maintainable way” is again super subjective. Normally when people say that what they really mean is in a way that fits a pattern familiar to them. If software stopped pandering and coddling developers who cannot be bothered to read code we would not need conversations like these. We also wouldn’t need a bunch of superficial nonsense most developers believe they cannot live without. Most companies drastica…

> Uugggghhh… “maintainable way” is again super subjective. It's not "super subjective" when something super niche like Haskell[1] is chosen. There are pragmatic reasons to choose a tech stack, the biggest of which is "can we find people to maintain it?". If you cannot, then it's unmaintainable. [1] That's the example that was chosen upthread.

You know there are entire companies using Haskell in production successfully and have been for years, right?

Re: How to be a -10x Engineer

#417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that's the case for most of the substantial software projects. The plan for the Linux kernel doesn't change each week (do they have "PMs"?). 15% seems very excessive. Almost a whole day a week and two days lost of deep work. Try to aim for 1.5%. Do as much of the planning as possible without a meeting.

Exactly. A real product driven company with a mature product isn't interacting with customers frequently enough to upend their plans every 1-2 weeks. How do people think Apple develops completely new product lines like the iPhone, iPad, watch, etc. There's a lot more up front planning (and yes .. of course, course corrections) than a lot of agile advocates want to admit. Most agile hyped up senior management I've met…

> isn't interacting with customers frequently enough to upend their plans every 1-2 weeks.

As I said, re-planning is more often than not needed because of technical challenges developers are running into. If one person is going to take 4 weeks to deliver something instead of the expected 2 days, lots of things may have to be rejiggered.

But also, yes even "real product driven company with a mature products" are changing plans every 1-2 weeks. Because each new incremental feature is a little project of its own. I never said plans get "upended" but they absolutely need to get re-adjusted ever 1-2 weeks based on both dev input and product/user reaction.

If you want to talk about the iPhone, just look up the history of how the software keyboard was developed. Talk about rapid prototyping and upending plans!

Re: How to be a -10x Engineer

#418

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only reason the 10+ authors (all plenty skilled in Haskell either before joining or due to working on the project) were all gone is because said senior came in and pushed them out. As I said, the team was fully functional, in production, low bug rate, generally happy. Is it really cheaper to rewrite an entire working system (that took a year+ to build in the first place) than to just learn something new? I have l…

> The only reason the 10+ authors (all plenty skilled in Haskell either before joining or due to working on the project) were all gone is because said senior came in and pushed them out. Yeah, but if the stack was something common then it still wouldn't be as big a problem.

I think you're missing my main point which is that it didn't happen. The project was successful and chugging along.

It was only when a drive-by principal engineer got wind of it that there were problems. "We don't use Haskell here" was literally the only argument for rewriting it. Nobody left before then. We were hiring people fine. The problems you are FUDing around didn't exist.

In fact, the rewrite was so slow and off-target that I had to maintain the Haskell project through a peak season with a skeleton crew of two other people who didn't leave. And we didn't even have an outage - I didn't even get paged! The project got to make the company millions of dollars yet again.

When the rewrite finally started to form, it actually had significantly less functionality than the Haskell implementation. The internal users complained so much about that. And it took just as long to create. What a failure that rewrite was.

In the end, it was the attitude you are espousing that killed the project, not anything technical or hiring-/team-building-wise. It was literally just an opinion not to use Haskell by a guy who couldn't be bothered for the life of him to try to understand it.

Re: How to be a -10x Engineer

#419

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember reading a blog post from a certain project management software startup bragging about their genius lead engineer who created this wonderful NIH frontend framework for them, how it worked, et c. Having used the product (which would not-infrequently manage to make keyboard input lag by full seconds on strong hardware, ate hundreds of megabytes of ram and tons of processor cycles while idle—even worse than yo…

I think referring to office 365 as a ‘software startup’ is a fairly long stretch, so I may have come to an incorrect conclusion but the rest is a fairly accurate description of o365 in my experience.

Asana.

[EDIT] Though to be fair—and why I hesitated to name them—I haven't used their product in four or five years, and it may be much better now. Looks like the framework they created is called Luna.

Re: How to be a -10x Engineer

#420

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah that was an interesting read. I like the concept of a -10x engineer because they definitely exist (in my mind it is someone whose work moves you farther away from the project goals, rather than closer to them). But a lot of the bullets sounded like stuff bad managers do, not bad engineers. Off the top of my head these are the most common two "negative engineer" behaviors I have seen 1) Biggest one: an engineer w…

Super subjective. The most common thing I see is developers compensating for this by never writing original code and then demonizing others who do when they cannot read it. By original code I don’t mean config files or glue for frameworks.

The "genius" who transforms complex systems into Eldritch horrors and the "swore an oath to never reinvent the wheel" glue engineer are equally as damaging imo.
Post reply on HN