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

The Making of Software Engineering Myths

modelviewculture.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 52 posts

Re: The Making of Software Engineering Myths

#41

Post by computerslol »

k__ wrote: post #33
benched wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I downvoted it because people will go to any rhetorical lengths, including "un-defining" the very word intelligence to death, just to believe some people aren't more intelligent than others. Oh, new rule! We can concede there are "10x" devs, but they have to write shit code! Give me a break.

Fair enough. But couldn't it be that those "real" 10x devs are so rare, that they aren't a "thing"? With real I mean those who don't write shitty code.

They ARE a thing. Work for any large and successful software company and you'll find (or hear stories about) at least one. Look for the people that are consistently put on mission critical projects.

There are more types of extraordinary developers, but 10x is the only one I hear consistently mentioned.

Re: The Making of Software Engineering Myths

#42

Post by melindajb »

"The best I can do, therefore, is this: my advice is to open your eyes to the pervasive influence of culture on all the things you deplore; to acquire and use whatever tools, from semiotics or literary criticism or whatever, seem to be handy in understanding the water of myth around you.

And when you get there: write about it (or sing, or make movies). This, really, is the key thing. Not only do we need to talk more, not less, about how we develop software, we also need to talk about the things we say: we need critique."

if only the discussion on hacker news would actually take this advice instead of arguing arcane bullshit. Hoping a few will take this tack. Please surprise me.

Re: The Making of Software Engineering Myths

#43

Post by frenchy »

benched wrote: post #18

Tons of 10x hate in here already. Is there a reason this is such a stumbling block for people? Is there a reason that isn't tinged by sour grapes? I'm like 99% convinced that I've worked with such people and seen what they can do. I'd be willing to buy that it isn't simply the individual, but the individual plus the right circumstances. But I absolutely can't say that I've never seen a single developer write a surpri…

Probably because self-styled 10x developers in real life are often developers who are good at creating technicall debt really quickly.

Re: The Making of Software Engineering Myths

#44

Post by benched »

frenchy wrote: post #43
benched wrote: post #18

Tons of 10x hate in here already. Is there a reason this is such a stumbling block for people? Is there a reason that isn't tinged by sour grapes? I'm like 99% convinced that I've worked with such people and seen what they can do. I'd be willing to buy that it isn't simply the individual, but the individual plus the right circumstances. But I absolutely can't say that I've never seen a single developer write a surpri…

Probably because self-styled 10x developers in real life are often developers who are good at creating technicall debt really quickly.

You are thinking of a different class of people than I am.

Re: The Making of Software Engineering Myths

#45

Post by jdlshore »

I've been a fan of Laurent's work in this area for a long time.

What I find most interesting is that Laurent's work is clearly about the pervasiveness of myth and the need to apply rigorous thinking to what we believe. It's not about the specific claims; those are (fascinating) examples.

And yet, every time, people get really worked up about the 10x issue. They ignore the broader point entirely and focus on that one claim. (I find it particularly interesting that they focus on 10x and not any of the other claims Laurent debunks. Perhaps because it's easily understood? Perhaps because it's easy to think of anecdotes? Perhaps—and I suspect this is the real truth—because they secretly believe in their hearts that they're among the Chosen, and Laurent's threatening their clubhouse?)

Laurent doesn't say, "there are no 10x programmers." He says, "the studies that claim 10x programmers are so weak as to be laughable, the notion of measuring productivity itself is controversial and poorly defined, and do you even know which ratio you're using when you say 10x, anyway?" (He's not quite so informal about it, but that's the gist.)

In other words, the 10x claim has yet to be defined, let alone subject to rigorous analysis.

But out of the woodwork come these people who say, "I've seen 10x, therefore it must be true!" (I can't help but believe that these are the same people who jump up and down saying "the plural of anecdote is not data.") To be blunt: irrelevant. Laurent didn't say "there are no 10x programmers." Sit down already. Read it again.

You know what? The 10x claim doesn't matter. Laurent's not even saying it matters. His argument is bigger, more interesting, and more valuable than that.

He's saying that people—us programmers, specifically, who so wish ourselves to be rational thinkers—believe things because we want them to be true. Not because of the "evidence" and "proof" we're so keen to demand when we hear something we don't like... but because they're the myths that surround us, and they make us feel good.

(And now I hope morendil will chime in and tell me how I've misinterpreted him. ;-) )

Re: The Making of Software Engineering Myths

#47

Post by sbilstein »

benched wrote: post #30
r00fus wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's important to distinguish 10x "developers" and 10x moments that a given developer has. It's like 1.000 game, a hat-trick or triple-double - sometimes any given player has the potential (though not all may be given the opportunity) to make their mark.

And yet nobody denies there was something highly unusual about Michael Jordan.

Lebron James does not make 10 times the contributions of the other players, but he makes the team incredible. The number attached to the 10x engineer is largely bullshit as well as not measurable. I've worked with engineers who make everyone around them much more productive through excellent library code or laying down dope infrastructure that everyone else can leverage. I've also worked with engineers who mentor other engineers extremely well giving those productivity gains in turn. That doesn't mean she is slinging ten times the code or tickets or whatever every one else on the team is; she is just enabling productivity gains by being an excellent team player. The notion of 10x is a misnomer at best and at worst cause people to focus on other measures that are ultimately meaningless...leading to burnout.

Re: The Making of Software Engineering Myths

#48

Post by Morendil »

jdlshore wrote: post #45

I've been a fan of Laurent's work in this area for a long time. What I find most interesting is that Laurent's work is clearly about the pervasiveness of myth and the need to apply rigorous thinking to what we believe. It's not about the specific claims; those are (fascinating) examples. And yet, every time, people get really worked up about the 10x issue. They ignore the broader point entirely and focus on that one…

You're quite right that people tend to miss the broader point.

Could be my fault, could be that more people - on this site in particular - ought to be familiar with pg's Disagreement Hierarchy: http://paulgraham.com/disagree.html

...or with its even more powerful cousin http://lesswrong.com/lw/85h/better_disagreement/

Re: The Making of Software Engineering Myths

#49

Post by benched »

sbilstein wrote: post #47
benched wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet nobody denies there was something highly unusual about Michael Jordan.

Lebron James does not make 10 times the contributions of the other players, but he makes the team incredible. The number attached to the 10x engineer is largely bullshit as well as not measurable. I've worked with engineers who make everyone around them much more productive through excellent library code or laying down dope infrastructure that everyone else can leverage. I've also worked with engineers who mentor oth…

Oh, ok. Look everyone, now it's the number that's the problem. How many more ways can we think of to discredit this notion, which is clearly so in need of discrediting? Get to work, people.

Re: The Making of Software Engineering Myths

#50

Post by melindajb »

jdlshore wrote: post #45

I've been a fan of Laurent's work in this area for a long time. What I find most interesting is that Laurent's work is clearly about the pervasiveness of myth and the need to apply rigorous thinking to what we believe. It's not about the specific claims; those are (fascinating) examples. And yet, every time, people get really worked up about the 10x issue. They ignore the broader point entirely and focus on that one…

LOVE this post. thank you. All these so called "analytic" minds making leaps of faith that make religion look well thought out. There is data that says the less you believe you are likely to be wrong, the more likely you are to be wrong.

Same goes for so much that passes as argument on Hacker News, especially on topics about which participants are largely ignorant.

Post reply on HN