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

Brilliant Jerks Cost More Than They Are Worth

retrospective.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 279 posts

Re: Brilliant Jerks Cost More Than They Are Worth

#171

Post by sqeaky »

hermitdev wrote: post #103
andreyz4k wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By the way, float(5) is slower, because it creates two objects instead of one.

One of my pet peeves in C++ is seeing: std::string s = ""; It causes calls to strlen and potentially memory allocations. Just use the default constructor!

It used to, but it doesn't anymore, presuming you use a reasonably recent compiler. If you enable optimizations the assembly for that snippet and the default constructor are identical, I last checked on some GCC 5 flavor, but I think it was like this all the way back in GCC 3 something.

Compilers can do some pretty fancy things with literals because they know they optimize constants known at compile time.

Re: Brilliant Jerks Cost More Than They Are Worth

#172

Post by tlogan »

beachy wrote: post #13

> A “No Jerks” Policy Must Be Built Into Your Culture. It is entirely possible to be extremely passionate (and even brilliant) without being a jerk. A “no jerks” policy must be preached and practiced from the highest levels. Following simplistic rules like this is usually what leaves us knee deep in the proverbial. Maybe I've been lucky, but I've never worked with anyone who's as much of a jerk as described in the ar…

I belive that "no jerks" policy basically means that everybody needs to be nice and civil with each other.

This does not mean that mistakes are allowed and things are done by consensus.

The problem with jerks is that they are jerks: people do not like them and it is hard to work with them and that is not good. Nothing else. Sometimes that is ok - but in many cases it is not ok since team and project needs to grow into other areas where that "brilliant jerk" will not be so brilliant.

Re: Brilliant Jerks Cost More Than They Are Worth

#173

Post by ImTalking »

antisthenes wrote: post #155
ImTalking wrote: post #137

Been there. Was involved in a telco software project where one person was a genius, a true unicorn. We were in meetings where some of his insight and perspective left us scratching our heads in amazement. Yet he was the most destructive co-worker I've ever come across. He never did anything. He would belittle others if they didn't grasp things. He would see a well-layout project plan and laugh and say that he could d…

So what's the best way for people like that to apply themselves in your view?

Despite his intellect, he was a child really and his only hope was for management to rein him in and focus on deliverables (which they did not).

Re: Brilliant Jerks Cost More Than They Are Worth

#174

Post by xiaoma »

pconner wrote: post #165
ktRolster wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

fwiw that kind of phrase isn't necessarily 'jerky.' As long as the person you are saying it to understands that you respect him/her, and are just disagreeing with their idea, then it can be fine. It's a risky communication strategy, but I wouldn't condemn everyone who uses it.

> As long as the person you are saying it to understands that you respect him/her what kind of person would say that with full vitriolic sincerity to someone they respect? Why say that when you could say, "I strongly disagree for the following reasons..." or something else similarly diplomatic and actually productive?

Oh right, and I forgot Marc Andreesen. This was from The Hard Thing About Hard Things:

    To: Marc Andreessen
    Cc: Mike Homer
    From: Ben Horowitz
    Subject : Launch
I guess we’re not going to wait until the 5th to launch the strategy.

— Ben

    To: Ben Horowitz
    Cc: Mike Homer, Jim Barksdale (CEO), Jim Clark (Chairman)
    From: Marc Andreessen
    Subject: Re: Launch
Apparently you do not understand how serious the situation is.We are getting killed killed killed out there. Our current product is radically worse than the competition. We’ve had nothing to say for months. As a result, we’ve lost over $3B in market capitalization. We are now in danger of losing the entire company and it’s all server product management’s fault.

Next time do the fucking interview yourself.

Fuck you,

Marc

Re: Brilliant Jerks Cost More Than They Are Worth

#176

Post by whack »

Two obvious counter-examples: Steve Jobs and Linus Torvalds.

10x programmer who says what he thinks, gives brutally honest feedback, doesn't couch his facts behind euphemisms or nice-guy behavior, and has extremely high standards for code quality? To many people, this description fits Linus to a T.

And even if you dispute the characterization of Linus as a jerk, Steve Jobs certainly was. I don't see how anyone can hear stories about the way he treats his colleagues and employees, and not admit that he's a jerk.

Did Linus and Steve cost their respective organizations/missions more than they contributed?

I think a more balanced answer to the value of jerks is... it depends. Some brilliant jerks, if put in senior enough roles and given sufficient influence, can produce outstanding work-product. Outstanding enough to justify the loss of morale and attrition all around them. But if you're going to hire a jerk and expect him to be another cog in the machine, he's much more likely to gum up the works instead.

Some roles require rare and outstanding talent above all else. And other roles require someone who can follow orders, work well with others, and not rock the boat too much. Whether or not you should hire a brilliant jerk, really depends on which type of role you're hiring for.

Re: Brilliant Jerks Cost More Than They Are Worth

#177

Post by crpatino »

ender7 wrote: post #152

People responding about how they personally aren't bothered by jerks are missing the point. It's great if you have thick skin, but it's hard enough to hire quality engineers without having to stipulate that they must also be psychologically hardened against lazy, petty, or oblivious aggression from coworkers (i.e. jerky behavior). If I can choose to hire one brilliant jerk or three merely "good" engineers who don't n…

There's room for exactly one hyper inflated ego in the Linux kernel development team. If you are not Linus, you are 25 years late.

Re: Brilliant Jerks Cost More Than They Are Worth

#178

Post by coss »

gydfi wrote: post #122
spacemanmatt wrote: post #66

The only "10x" developer I have worked with taught me not only a ton about agile teams, but also about the liberal use of interpersonal skills in advancement of that goal. We routinely worked with education administrators (former teachers) who all had classroom experience and professional interpersonal skills training. It was amazing to work with people you could simply expect respect from, even when everyone was wel…

I don't believe in 10x developers, but I've seen a lot of 0.1x developers.

haha this is brilliant

Re: Brilliant Jerks Cost More Than They Are Worth

#180

Post by cthalupa »

I don't think there's a causal relation between brilliance and jerk level, but:

It's a sliding scale. Does the contribution of the jerk outweigh the loss of contribution from people offput by his attitude?

Linus is a jerk, and while Linux might have been even more successful if he wasn't, that isn't who he is. Should we ignore the success of Linux just because the original creator can be an asshole at times?

I'd much rather work with a brilliant nice guy than a brilliant jerk, but sometimes you don't get that choice. Sometimes your choice is a brilliant jerk who has the vision, drive, and ability to succeed at whatever your goal is, and a nice guy who doesn't.

Post reply on HN