Live data from Hacker News

Why I code as a CTO

assembled.com

181–190 of 304 posts

Re: Why I code as a CTO

#181
post #176

Please, do not. Nobody will do a real code review for such a person. Nobody will start a discussion if this or that change makes sense. If you have managerial position stick to it and do not make other people's lives miserable

Depends a lot on the culture. I used to work for a small team of about 10-15 engineers and the CTO was a good person. He would write code about as much as the rest of us. He was just the leader, engi 0. So we treated his code reviews similarly. It was actually nice giving him review because asking questions would be met with more business context and would be a good way to learn about the development process.

Any good engineer will be grateful you find issues in their work, especially if you help track down solutions.

Of course, the CTO depending on AI to solve things may be less like that, IDK. Or even before AI I knew the type. I once gave a new CTO a whitepaper to read in private to understand some of the direction I was taking a project, and he basically flipped out. So YMMV.

Re: Why I code as a CTO

#182
post #18
post #8

Possibly unpopular, but this is an interesting topic, so I'll post my counterpoint. The question is: what are you not doing that is in the list of CTO responsibilities because you're coding? One of the reasons stated why you do this is "because you enjoy it", and on the list of reasons you need to do it is there are only a handful of people in the org that can ship new product surface area. That's...concerning. That…

Again, implies there is such a thing as a "list of CTO responsibilities". Companies can decide to give their CTO x or y portfolio, but by the time a company reaches the point where titles matter, it's hard to think of an intrinsically "CTO" responsibility that isn't covered by a VP/E or VP/PM. The one thing I can think of is "organization-wide architecture oversight", which is a pretty toxic role to assign. In orgs w…

> The one thing I can think of is “organization-wide architecture oversight”, which is a pretty toxic role to assign.

I don’t know that I understand what you mean by toxic or why, but I’ve only ever seen the architecture overseer kind of thing in pretty small companies. In big companies, where there are multiple VPs of engineering and product management, that feels like the only time CTO even makes sense, and I expect they need to be setting vision and deciding where to invest (i.e. setting budgets) sometimes handling legal issues. In such large companies I’ve never seen a CTO providing architecture oversight, let alone coding. They might mandate the use or avoidance of some tech for reasons of corporate politics, but they are never in the trenches.

Having been a founding engineer in a startup where I was called CTO and mostly wrote code, I feel like this is a ‘cute’ thing we do, using C-level role names for everyone in a 3 person company. I didn’t feel like a real CTO, or VP, and I feel like using C-level names for roles in startups and small companies is a little goofy and awkward. A lot of people seem to like inflated role titles, and VCs seem to like having someone in key roles who can both lead well and take all responsibility and blame. I feel like ideally the name CTO shouldn’t be used until it’s needed, which isn’t until there are enough devs to need managers, and enough managers to need VPs and enough VPs to need a CTO. If that were the case, then the possible things on the list of CTO responsibilities is a lot smaller and more definable than if we say CTO can be anything including the 2nd founder who’s more interested in coding than pitching or marketing.

Re: Why I code as a CTO

#184
Most comments here are assuming that there’s only “one, true CTO” role when in fact the role is essentially “everything that’s left over after you’ve delegated to others”.

> When I was figuring out my role as CTO, I read Greg Brockman’s blog post about defining the CTO role at Stripe. He talked to a bunch of other CTOs and realized there’s enormous variance in what the role looks like. Some CTOs are technical visionaries, some are org builders, some are infrastructure-focused. The commonality is that great CTOs figure out where they can create the most value given their particular skills, interests, and company context.

> For me, that’s meant writing a lot of code. It works because of my particular context: I enjoy building software more than org design, I have deep customer and codebase knowledge that makes me particularly effective, and we’ve hired strong engineering managers.

Re: Why I code as a CTO

#185

Man, if I'm trying to decide which company to work for, and I see a blog post from its CTO crowing about regularly checking in code on Saturdays and Sundays, I'd start backing slowly away. And when I got to the bit that said "AI has made me three times as productive," I'd turn and run. Your job at the top is, more than anything else, pushing down a healthy culture. That includes things like setting an example of not…

It seems like you're confusing technical founder CTO at a startup with professional CTO at a large org.

For the later, what you said makes some sense, and it definitely seems like you're more familiar with this archetype.

For the former, the article appears correct. If you've not worked at an early stage startup before, the culture is _very_ different.

As a side note: This article is doing it's job. People that are a good fit for the company will agree, and want to work with them. People that are not a good fit for the company will not agree, and naturally run the other way. Makes filtering out candidates easier.

Re: Why I code as a CTO

#186
I don't want to come across as judgemental or anything, nor I did deep research on your background.

It appears like you became a CTO, because you co-founded the company, not because you rose to the rank.

If you were to join a different company with this approach you are taking, I doubt if you would even reach Staff level.

Re: Why I code as a CTO

#187
I’m not totally against CTOs who code (I like having management that I respect technically) but it sounds like this CTO is pretty clearly doing too much coding and not enough CTO-ing.

Posts like these show why the founding engineer is the most underpaid person in Silicon Valley. This CTO probably has 30% of the company. There’s probably a founding engineer doing 90% of the same work for years (and likely doing the technical bits better) for 1-1.5% of the company max.

Re: Why I code as a CTO

#188
post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Staff engineer. Founders don’t necessarily need to hold CXO titles to work in the startups they founded.

A few examples that spring to mind, Steve Wozniak and Mitchell Hashimoto

Wasn't Mitchell Hashimoto only a non-CxO for a handful of months between stepping down and selling the company?

Re: Why I code as a CTO

#190

Man, if I'm trying to decide which company to work for, and I see a blog post from its CTO crowing about regularly checking in code on Saturdays and Sundays, I'd start backing slowly away. And when I got to the bit that said "AI has made me three times as productive," I'd turn and run. Your job at the top is, more than anything else, pushing down a healthy culture. That includes things like setting an example of not…

he's also casually trashing their engineering team... "I built it in a day" is suggesting no one else could have. I personally don't think there's anything wrong with doing it (i.e. shipping a feature quickly that a customer needs), but writing a blog post about it is questionable.

No, he clearly points that anyone else would have to be taken off their existing work and would have to context-switch to the context he already has. That's not trashing his engineering team.
Post reply on HN