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

Let the Other 95% of Great Programmers In

paulgraham.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

631–640 of 655 posts

Re: Let the Other 95% of Great Programmers In

#631

Post by yellow_and_gray »

waterlesscloud wrote: post #623
yellow_and_gray wrote: post #621

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not only about wages. It's also about total wealth generated, which is driven by growth. The issue is you hit a limit. Any startup eventually hits the limits of the market it operates in. But the point is startups don't get the chance to hit those market limits. The limit they hit first is they can't get great programmers. Their growth is stiffled early on. Here's an example. Assume a startup is working on only…

We are nowhere near the limit of VC wealth preventing the hiring of great programmers. In other words, the wealth generated by previous waves of great programmers working on projects is most definitely not the limiting factor here. Why would more wealth then generate more projects?

It's not more wealth that would generate more projects. It's finishing a previous project that would generate more projects. You don't even get to finish the project without a great programmer so you don't get to start new projects. New projects can depend on older projects.

Generating that wealth serves as proof the project completed, which justifies moving on. It's not merely being handed that wealth by a VC that completes the project because then you didn't generate anything. All you did was transfer wealth between two parties. Having wealth isn't enough to generate new wealth in tech. You also need skill.

What having more wealth would do is help pay for more great programmers but it's neither the driving nor the limiting force. The limiting force is having great programmers. They are the ones who generate new wealth.

So what you said possibly supports the argument that it's not about wages. If there were unlimited great programmers, we might indeed hit a limit on VC wealth. We could be nowhere that limit because there aren't enough great programmers.

My comment above was confusing in that it makes someone think a limit in VC wealth is what makes it prohibitive to hire great programmers. That's not what I meant to say. I meant to say that if you are limited in having great programmers, then the total amount of wealth you can generate is also limited. The US, and any country, would be better off having more great programmers.

The limit you hit is in having great programmers. Lack of great programmers limits growth. Lack of growth limits wealth.

I wish PG revised his essay to make this point.

Re: Let the Other 95% of Great Programmers In

#632

Post by ryanSrich »

ryanSrich wrote: post #620
tolmasky wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Warning, anecdotal data ahead: I would not want to work under remote conditions again. In my career I have worked mainly under "startup conditions". At Apple on iPhone, everyone lived in the same place and worked non stop on the product, same as when I left to start a company. On my second company, I had many remote workers. The reality I experienced is that there was at least a 2-3x slowdown. When people are on diff…

I'm not sure when you worked remotely but I can tell you remote work in 2014 is much much different. First off, using email internally for communication makes no sense. If you're a truly distributed team[1] you use teamspeak, or hangouts, or slack, or IRC, or anything other than email. Second there are no radically different timezones within the US. If you're on the east coast you work most days from 10 - 6, if you'r…

Continue to downvote me but please at least reply with a comment as to why you disagree.

Re: Let the Other 95% of Great Programmers In

#633

Post by tsotha »

No1 wrote: post #279
petilon wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please read footnote [2] in Paul Graham's article. He is against the importation of low-cost programmers. He is only for the importation of exceptional programmers, regardless of where they were born.

The sentiment is nice, but the only selection mechanism presented is that "An influx of inexpensive but mediocre programmers is the last thing they'd want; it would destroy them." One only need look at the current H1B situation to see just how eager most tech companies are to add another mediocre programmer at 30% off market rates.

Graham is missing the 99% of the market that isn't fast growing startups. Large companies don't have any way to evaluate "10x" programmers. I'm sure they'll take those kinds of people if they just happen to luck into one.

But big companies will be happy with mediocre programmers who fill a seat and can implement the latest company security initiative on the tiny section of code that's "theirs" as long as it doesn't cost too much.

In principle I agree with him - we should let in geniuses and people with skills that benefit everyone. But that's just the cover large companies are using to push down their labor costs.

Re: Let the Other 95% of Great Programmers In

#634

Post by tsotha »

igonvalue wrote: post #482
jonny_eh wrote: post #465

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you can't hire someone at your expected price then maybe you should raise it. Maybe the market price has gone higher than what you perceive it to be. That CEO could find his 30 "10x" engineers in a heartbeat if he offered 300-500k. Its not your god given right to be able to hire x number of employees for the price you hired your previous employees at. It's a zero-sum game. If company X hires all 30 of the best e…

It's not a zero-sum game. Increased wages for engineers would encourage more people to become engineers.

This. Wall Street is full of near-geniuses who would be doing something more productive if finance companies weren't the ones offering the biggest salaries.

Re: Let the Other 95% of Great Programmers In

#635

Post by bahmutov »

You want great programmers? Exceptional? Why would any exceptional programmer go to US on H1B visa? It is such a short leash - no way anyone truly great would trade Europe or Asia for a chance to be a slave in a cubicle, ready to be fired at moment's notice.

You want exceptional programmers, Paul? I will tell you a way to find the truly great ones, and promise that other developers will NOT be against it. Any developer can come here, provided that the hiring company:

1. Pays him / her $1,000,000 (1 million US dollars) per year, tied to inflation. I don't care how you search or decide, but that is the best indicator of a truly exceptional programmer - paying him / her a LOT. 2. If the contract is broken for any reason, the exceptional developer gets the severance package, for example a 6 months salary.

Hmm, I do not see you or anyone else advocating for exceptional salaries to pay for an exceptional programming talent. Case closed.

Re: Let the Other 95% of Great Programmers In

#636

Post by waterlesscloud »

yellow_and_gray wrote: post #631
waterlesscloud wrote: post #623

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are nowhere near the limit of VC wealth preventing the hiring of great programmers. In other words, the wealth generated by previous waves of great programmers working on projects is most definitely not the limiting factor here. Why would more wealth then generate more projects?

It's not more wealth that would generate more projects. It's finishing a previous project that would generate more projects. You don't even get to finish the project without a great programmer so you don't get to start new projects. New projects can depend on older projects. Generating that wealth serves as proof the project completed, which justifies moving on. It's not merely being handed that wealth by a VC that c…

And lack of pay limits the number of great programmers. So there we are.

Re: Let the Other 95% of Great Programmers In

#637

Post by melindajb »

jacquesm wrote: post #155

Why limit this to programmers? It's not as if we're some kind of privileged and special sub-species of humanity. People should be allowed to move around the globe at will without those pesky borders. That would be one way to get us out of the hole we're in. Drawing arbitrary lines for certain professions and not for others only further deepens the gap. Companies have long ago figured out ways to go trans-national, si…

This is so true. salaries could drop fast if people could work from anywhere. Lots of people would take a pay cut to live in a less expensive part of the country near family with better schools and quality of life.

Re: Let the Other 95% of Great Programmers In

#638

Post by melindajb »

OmarIsmail wrote: post #77
gaius wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

... And he could, if he simply out-bid his competitors.

Businesses die when they run out of money. Paying your programmers 3-500K/year is a sure fire way to run out of money really quickly. And while a great programmer is obviously worth it, most companies (at the early stage) have so many external factors that even a great programmer isn't enough, they need the time to iterate and find product market fit. You know the whole lean startup thing. So how do you circle that s…

there is no god given right to cheap labor.

the problem here is that investors want to have it both ways; a free market in terms of laws, restrictions, HR policies, etc, but when that same free market drives up their costs, all of a sudden "whoa, why do we have to pay this?"

If the market can't support high priced labor, then you should go out of business. Simple. That's the way business works.

Re: Let the Other 95% of Great Programmers In

#639

Post by yellow_and_gray »

waterlesscloud wrote: post #636
yellow_and_gray wrote: post #631

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not more wealth that would generate more projects. It's finishing a previous project that would generate more projects. You don't even get to finish the project without a great programmer so you don't get to start new projects. New projects can depend on older projects. Generating that wealth serves as proof the project completed, which justifies moving on. It's not merely being handed that wealth by a VC that c…

And lack of pay limits the number of great programmers. So there we are.

Once all great programmers get a job they like they don't switch, even if you have the money to pay them more. They like what they are working on.

If a great programmer is working on the next Google, and you pay them more to work on something boring, they won't switch.

The limit is the total number of great programmers.

Re: Let the Other 95% of Great Programmers In

#640

Post by waterlesscloud »

yellow_and_gray wrote: post #639
waterlesscloud wrote: post #636

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And lack of pay limits the number of great programmers. So there we are.

Once all great programmers get a job they like they don't switch, even if you have the money to pay them more. They like what they are working on. If a great programmer is working on the next Google, and you pay them more to work on something boring, they won't switch. The limit is the total number of great programmers.

Yes, there's a limit. And we're nowhere near it.

And we won't be until the rewards for being a great programmer exceed the rewards for other options.

If it's as crucial as is claimed, increase the rewards. Really simple.

Post reply on HN