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

Not a real engineer (2019)

twitchard.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 86 posts

Re: Not a real engineer (2019)

#61

Post by ido »

cybrox wrote: post #60
higeorge13 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Curious but how do you identify these 5x engineers from a couple interview rounds?

In our process, we use almost the simplest possible tasks like making an HTTP request to our API and displaying the data im some form and ask people to solve them 'just as they would as part of a project they are working on'. They get a timeframe and have to quickly elaborate on their process, what they got done and what they didn't get done. There are drastic differences between candidates. Some barely manage the ta…

This is similar to what I do (details depend on the specific position).

Re: Not a real engineer (2019)

#62

Post by ponector »

exclusiv wrote: post #26

I just recently got into Steve Howe. He's considered one of, if not the best guitarist of all time and I came across a quote he had that said something like he wished guitarists would focus on being musicians. Same thing as coders to engineers. I've come across more technically able programmers than I am. But they aren't better engineers. And a lot of that is because I'm an entrepreneur and have a marketing secondary…

But that is the market. 99% employers don't want engineers, they want cheap modern-framework-coders.

Real market values more Spring java coders than C++ engineers who work with hardware.

Re: Not a real engineer (2019)

#63

Post by ponector »

ido wrote: post #57
hliyan wrote: post #51

I've recently given up on the idea of hiring genius level engineers for jobs that require building CRUD applications 80% of their time. It's a waste of money, a waste of the talent pool, a disservice to the candidate and a future risk to the company as such individuals will inevitably get bored and start over-engineering things to keep their minds occupied. For most engineers (but not all), being able to correctly wr…

I’ve been a hiring manager on multiple teams and it’s not that straight forward…Yes, I don’t need John Carmack for my non-Carmack-level technical challenges. But I’ve seen “ok” programmers perform “adequately” (the project got made to acceptable level) but also seen better programmers work 5x faster (without working 5x the hours, or even more hours at all), be able to mostly self-manage, not need constant qa support…

Really smart programmer will work x5 faster but report as if he did x1.3 faster than peers, using rest of the time for personal development or other activities.

Re: Not a real engineer (2019)

#64

Post by nine_k »

hliyan wrote: post #56
tiberriver256 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're describing a genius level engineer. At least in today's world of SPAs and microservices.

And therein lies part of the problem. Just as you don't need genius level engineers to do applications that are 80% CRUD, you don't need genius level technologies either. Hiring the former can lead to the development of the latter. Sometimes, the LAMP stack will do.

Sometimes it takes an above-average engineer to go against the fashion and say that a LAMP monolith should suffice. In particular, it requires an ability to realistically estimate the load and the complexity.

Re: Not a real engineer (2019)

#65

Post by mp05 »

altdataseller wrote: post #48
exclusiv wrote: post #26

I just recently got into Steve Howe. He's considered one of, if not the best guitarist of all time and I came across a quote he had that said something like he wished guitarists would focus on being musicians. Same thing as coders to engineers. I've come across more technically able programmers than I am. But they aren't better engineers. And a lot of that is because I'm an entrepreneur and have a marketing secondary…

What are some examples on how a non coding skillset makes you a better engineer?

- creativity and an understanding of humans that, at the least, borders on genuine interest. unless you design chips then who cares I suppose??

Re: Not a real engineer (2019)

#66

Post by mp05 »

exclusiv wrote: post #26

I just recently got into Steve Howe. He's considered one of, if not the best guitarist of all time and I came across a quote he had that said something like he wished guitarists would focus on being musicians. Same thing as coders to engineers. I've come across more technically able programmers than I am. But they aren't better engineers. And a lot of that is because I'm an entrepreneur and have a marketing secondary…

You're onto something but it flies in the face of a bit of convention as you're probably not the standard personality that gets into engineering.

I think it's a fine career to go to school, get your BS in whatever technical field you choose, and work as engineer #52354 at Ingersoll Rand, or Boeing, or whomever, and retire after 30 years of being master of your highly complex but perhaps limited domain. That is a very valid definition of an "engineer". These people probably have very fulfilling personal lives that you'd probably see as miserably boring, and that's okay.

I've thought hard lately about this sort of thing, and one thing that seems clear to me is that management likely sees the "standard engineer" is a cost sink where someone like yourself may escape that sort of criticism as your value transcends just engineering and into other departments that directly generate revenue.

For what it's worth, we sound like the same type of engineer but I've worked to try and turn what may be contempt for the stereotype into something more... collaborative.

Re: Not a real engineer (2019)

#67

Post by uguuo_o »

l33t7332273 wrote: post #32
uguuo_o wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just a minor note. Howe is good, one of the best yes, but Paco De Lucia reigns far above them all.

Can you add some qualitative comparisons that make you say that?

I'm just relaying what most guitarists that have played with him have said. Watch a few interviews, jazz, flamenco, whatever he plays.

Here an example of his playing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C97H_HvBjPA

30 years playing guitar, I believe I can recognize masters, but this guy is just wow.

Re: Not a real engineer (2019)

#68

Post by shermantanktop »

TacticalCoder wrote: post #53
rewmie wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've lived both sides of this. I’ve been subjected to the mysterious whims and casual insults of the job-seeking process. I've grown to learn that it's important to understand that interviewing in particular and job-seeking in general is not an objective and impartial process, and the output is not deterministic or reproducible. You can be hired even when there are objectively better people in the race, and you can…

> I personally know FANG engineers with half a dozen years of high-profile work who had to spend weeks training coding golf and algo&data structures trivia before passing the first round of interviews > all because these trivia games bear no resemblance with real world software engineering You may actually agree with GP for he is not talking about that. GP is talking about FizzBuzz : less than ten lines of code and t…

I’m at a FAANG-type company and have interviewed over 1k engineers at all levels, but mostly senior+. The coding questions I ask aren’t literally FizzBuzz, but do involve counting, looping, conditionals, etc. Good solutions are possible in 30m and take 30 lines of code or less. And I’m not looking for beauty or perfect efficiency, I’m looking for code that works and which the candidate can explain.

Example: given the x/y coordinates of a rectangle, can you write a function that tells me which points in array are inside or outside?

Other companies may get a different pool of candidates, so such a low-pass filter may not be necessary. But these people have resumes which describe them as capable engineers. What I usually find is they are no longer coding much, but are doing design reviews, code reviews, and attending meetings.

Re: Not a real engineer (2019)

#69

Post by ido »

ponector wrote: post #63
ido wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve been a hiring manager on multiple teams and it’s not that straight forward…Yes, I don’t need John Carmack for my non-Carmack-level technical challenges. But I’ve seen “ok” programmers perform “adequately” (the project got made to acceptable level) but also seen better programmers work 5x faster (without working 5x the hours, or even more hours at all), be able to mostly self-manage, not need constant qa support…

Really smart programmer will work x5 faster but report as if he did x1.3 faster than peers, using rest of the time for personal development or other activities.

I will probably not keep an engineer that performs at 1.3x of a mediocre programmer for long (unless they’re junior and I see potential, I.e. I’m investing in the future). It’s also not about “smarts” but about being a good fit for the job (which includes stuff like being motivated and interested in the work).

That is - an “ok” developer that performs “adequately” is not actually sufficient and it’s have to be specific circumstances for me to compromise on keeping them (e.g. I can’t find anyone better, but historically this hasn’t been the case).

Re: Not a real engineer (2019)

#70

Post by shermantanktop »

wcrossbow wrote: post #42
uguuo_o wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just a minor note. Howe is good, one of the best yes, but Paco De Lucia reigns far above them all.

There is no best musician. Not just because there are a multitude of different skills that go into it, but also because nobody agrees on what weight to give to each of them or even what they are. This makes it impossible to make an absolute ranking. At best you would get a Pareto front made up of the greatest.

Any time somebody makes a claim that their passionate judgment about a subjective topic is objectively true, that’s a bit-flip moment for me. Doesn’t mean I will ignore them, but we are now having a different conversation. They are a “fan” and discussions with fans are often not that interesting.

And fwiw, Paco De Lucia is technically skilled to a fault, but does very little for me.

Post reply on HN