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

10X Programmer and Other Software Engineering Myths

blog.fogcreek.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 84 posts

Re: 10X Programmer and Other Software Engineering Myths

#31

Post by cauterized »

pc86 wrote: post #17
vkjv wrote: post #2

I think like a lot of myths, there is a kernel of truth in the 10x programmer myth. The fact is, some problems are hard. Some problems are beyond the grasp of some developers. Even given unlimited time an individual may not ever accomplish the goal. I can certainly think of problem sets where that is true of myself. In those specific circumstances, that person can be considered a "10x programmer" when compared with a…

Ten times zero is still zero. It's a given that some people are more productive than others. They are faster typists, or they can architect a system of similar quality faster, or they can just write good code faster. But remember the idea of 10x came from studies of similarly experienced programmers. And supposedly, the order of magnitude comes from actual data, although I've never been able to see it. For most trivi…

The whole point of the article is that the original claim from the original data is suspect and quite likely extremely outdated even if it was a valid conclusion in the first place.

Re: 10X Programmer and Other Software Engineering Myths

#33

Post by Delmania »

jasode wrote: post #15

>these papers did not actually bring any original evidence in support of the notion that some programmers are 10X better than others, [...] What I’ve been saying is that the data is not actually there, so we do not have any strong proof of the actual claim. I can agree with the specific observation that there is no consensus on concrete quantifiable data to prove "10x" with mathematical rigor. Ok, let's set aside "10…

"If they are a league above other average programmers, what's an acceptable description that you'd use?"

Dedicated. These individuals have mastered their domain; they have spent years learning and practicing. They have built knowledge and skills that can be transferred to other domains. I think people need to stop focusing on the label, and start focusing on the process.

I don't believe a person is born a 10X programmer. It's only achieved through discipline.

Re: 10X Programmer and Other Software Engineering Myths

#34

Post by tomgp »

arocks wrote: post #14

I am glad that someone took the efforts to dig around and dispel these myths. But then even more important is the question - why we don't have enough evidence based scientific studies in the world of software? My guess is that it is because no two software projects are alike. Differences stemming from differing technology stacks, to domains or people skills, it is practically impossible to generalize anything across…

>why we don't have enough evidence based scientific studies in the world of software

If you're interested in this stuff you could do worse than checking out Andy Oram and Greg Wilsons 'Making Software: What Really Works, and Why We Believe It' a series of literature reviews on various topics including the 10x programmer thing, different development methodologies and practices. It's not perfect but it's a good start and helped me to think critically about my own practice.

Re: 10X Programmer and Other Software Engineering Myths

#35

Post by awkward »

jasode wrote: post #15

>these papers did not actually bring any original evidence in support of the notion that some programmers are 10X better than others, [...] What I’ve been saying is that the data is not actually there, so we do not have any strong proof of the actual claim. I can agree with the specific observation that there is no consensus on concrete quantifiable data to prove "10x" with mathematical rigor. Ok, let's set aside "10…

The objection to the term is not because all programmers are average, or because any programmer could step up and be a John Carmack. The objection is that the idea of the 10x programmer creates the perception that hiring someone of that caliber for a low to mid level engineering position is an achievable goal that businesses should aspire to, and for less than 10x the price.

Re: 10X Programmer and Other Software Engineering Myths

#36

Post by Dirlewanger »

crusso wrote: post #18
adamzerner wrote: post #4

He doesn't say that the 10x programmer is a myth. Just that there isn't academic research that proves it to be true, which hardly means that it's wrong.

Right. In order to "debunk the myth of the 10x programmer", I'd expect to see research that shows that the phenomenon isn't true - not just that research wasn't modern enough or wasn't completely relevant to modern methods of programming. In my experience, there are 10x programmers out there. I've known a couple in my 20 professional years who exceeded that. The fact that there isn't research proving it only tells me…

This is very much one of those things that after a couple years in the industry you'll just intuitively have a grasp on. And when one has a large sample size of similar intuitions stemming from experience...well, it's hard to completely discredit such notions.

Re: 10X Programmer and Other Software Engineering Myths

#37

Post by Tloewald »

jasode wrote: post #15

>these papers did not actually bring any original evidence in support of the notion that some programmers are 10X better than others, [...] What I’ve been saying is that the data is not actually there, so we do not have any strong proof of the actual claim. I can agree with the specific observation that there is no consensus on concrete quantifiable data to prove "10x" with mathematical rigor. Ok, let's set aside "10…

The real problem with the 10x programmer idea is that the programmers we all think of do not necessarily write more code, or even write a given piece of code faster, they write more valuable code -- code that most other programmers simply wouldn't or couldn't write.

My favorite example of this is the -2000 lines of code story about Bill Atkinson (QuickDraw, MacPaint, HyperCard):

http://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?story=Negative_2000_Lin...

Re: 10X Programmer and Other Software Engineering Myths

#38

Post by shubhamjain »

jasode wrote: post #15

>these papers did not actually bring any original evidence in support of the notion that some programmers are 10X better than others, [...] What I’ve been saying is that the data is not actually there, so we do not have any strong proof of the actual claim. I can agree with the specific observation that there is no consensus on concrete quantifiable data to prove "10x" with mathematical rigor. Ok, let's set aside "10…

> Ok, let's set aside "10x" because many previous discussions about it have shown it is a distasteful description to some. For those who do not believe in the "10x programmer", how do you feel about programmers such as John Carmack (Doom, Oculus)[1], Fabrice Bellard (ffmpeg, pi algorithm)[2], Linus Torvalds (Linux, Git), TJ Holowaychuk (node.js projects)?

I don't question that those brilliance of the people you mentioned but as edw519 says, in his free ebook [1],

> I'm not suggesting that you'll go out and write Rails in 3 weekends. What I am suggesting is that the more I meet "famous" hackers and the more I meet people from this community (online and offline), the more I realize that there's not really all that much that separates us.

> Lot's of people are obviously brilliant. And even for those who are a little less brilliant, brilliance is only one part of the equation. Work habits, determination, perseverence, passion, and maybe most of all, belief, are just as important. Don't sell yourself short.

What I suggest is, a magical genetic gift, might not be the reason why those guys achieved so much. It might be because they were more "aggressive" and "focused" hackers. They insisted on building everyday and chose to work upon very challenging problems.

[1]: http://static.v25media.com/edw519_mod.html

Re: 10X Programmer and Other Software Engineering Myths

#39

Post by k__ »

jasode wrote: post #15

>these papers did not actually bring any original evidence in support of the notion that some programmers are 10X better than others, [...] What I’ve been saying is that the data is not actually there, so we do not have any strong proof of the actual claim. I can agree with the specific observation that there is no consensus on concrete quantifiable data to prove "10x" with mathematical rigor. Ok, let's set aside "10…

Maybe the problem is, that hiring companies think that programmers like Carmack or Torvalds are so plentiful that even they have a chance to score one of them.

Re: 10X Programmer and Other Software Engineering Myths

#40

Post by msandford »

I think it's hilarious that Fog Creek is devoting effort to debunking a large part of the core of Fog Creek; namely that there is such a thing as a 5x or 10x programmer.

http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/HighNotes.html

His theory is that salaries are distributed fairly normally so the top of the heap might only demand 2x the salary of an average, and only 4x the salary of the bottom. But they might be 10x as skilled or productive. That means that they're actually cheaper. 10x work divided by 4x cost = 2.5x productivity.

Post reply on HN