Live data from Hacker News

There are no 10x developers, but there are 1/10 ones

techfounder.net

21–30 of 173 posts

Re: There are no 10x developers, but there are 1/10 ones

#21

How to tell whether I'm a 1/10x developer or not? Often it took me 3 months just to get a asp.net web application, as I'm unable to cope with the frequent requirement changes.

I was wondering just the same thing. I can build features and ship code, but I'm definitely slower than my co-worker (who has been on the project for over 1 year, while I'm just in my first 3 months). How can we measure where we fit on the scale?

A lot of the productivity difference is probably due to overall familiarity with the code base. In a year from now when you have to fix a bug or add a feature you will probably know where to go and have an idea of what needs to be done rather than having to go hunting for it or asking another developer. If a project is started from scratch I imagine a lot of difference in productivity is due to familiarity with the tools, frameworks, api's, etc. used.

Re: There are no 10x developers, but there are 1/10 ones

#22
"x10 developers" are, in fact, proficient developers, who are experienced with their stack and problem domain.

Well, I'd say this is only true for your typical corporate entity, where their products are basically just web applications that represent a state machine using some sort of database store for persistence (which is... basically everything). By the time the company has achieved some size, there's enough process and bureaucracy and projects mostly consist of what the OP described -- migrating from one framework to another, or some other incremental enhancement that's hardly pushing any sort of business of technology threshold. At previous employers that fit this description, I could have easily been 10x more productive if I didn't have to endure four hour sprint planning meetings or be required by an understaffed QA/DBA/sysadmin team to approve my code before release, all to do completely routine development changes that required no serious problem-solving.

This doesn't mean I'm a 10x developer. It probably means I'm a 1x developer, so a 'true' 10x developer would have been 100x more productive without the aforementioned bureaucratic crap. At these companies that would dogmatically follow Agile and had two week sprints, I might spend four hours, across two days, actually developing -- with the rest of the days filled with various meetings, interviews, waiting for QA/DBA/sysadmins, fucking around, etc. I could easily see how someone could spend only 15 minutes on what took me four hours, and his solutions would likely be more elegant. It doesn't matter -- the limiting factor isn't the development time, or even the development quality. In that environment, there is literally no difference in productive gains between a proficient developer and a 10x developer.

Given a "10x developer" is literally defined by his productivity/quality, if you think they're effectively overhyped/nonexistent, ask yourself this: are you in an environment where a 10x developer could actually demonstrate 10x productivity? At most companies, the answer is no, because a 10x engineer is doing in hours what takes people days, and nobody notices. But in the right environment, the 10x engineer will do in weeks what would take proficient engineers months, or do in months what would take years. They're the people that Steve Yegge calls "Done and Gets Things Smart"[0] or that Rands calls "Free Electrons"[1].

And if you work at a company that can't think in terms of months because it's always concerned about quarterly earnings, then they have no use for 10x developer, and chances are you couldn't even tell if one was even there.

[0] http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2008/06/done-and-gets-things...

[1] http://www.randsinrepose.com/archives/2005/03/20/free_electr...

Re: There are no 10x developers, but there are 1/10 ones

#23
In my experience there are both. There are certainly a fair number of 1/10ers that manage to progress through seemingly normal career paths as programmers despite not being very good. I've worked with some, and most of you who are also developers probably have as well. But there are also for-real 10xers on top of the baseline. John Carmack, Jeff Dean, Fabrice Bellard, et al. If you define hyper-productive programmers like those guys as your baseline then like 99.9999% of working programmers need to quit in shame.

Re: There are no 10x developers, but there are 1/10 ones

#24
I think the problem is that the author has normalized his development standard to proficient coders in the tech industry. I used to do enterprise software in the midwest and there are legions of 1/10th developers out there. Its easy move your baseline far away from the average when you are in the echo-chamber of high-tech startups. Compared to the true average developer there are definitely 10x developers.

Re: There are no 10x developers, but there are 1/10 ones

#25

I guess I don't get it. This Ph.D candidate was recommended by the previous CTO and was the one spearheading the framework transition...and then was fired after 2 weeks? But junior devs at the previous firm were given months to get up to speed?

The fact that someone was recommended by a chain of people doesn't mean that good, or even competent. Perhaps the old CTOs weren't competent to judge or didn't have enough experience to have a proper baseline.

It's quite possible that I could judge someone at some task (say cutting & laying intricate tiles), and think they're quite good. They may seem fast to me because they're doing something that would take me forever. But if you brought in a real professional, they may laugh and say worker is going to slow.

The author said that the coder in question didn't show any improvement after 2 weeks of coaching. The developers at the previous firm he mentioned were slowly improving, that's why he kept them. From my reading I got the impression that if the PhD candidate had improved, he would still be there.

Re: There are no 10x developers, but there are 1/10 ones

#26
If you ask me to design a programming language, I'm a 0 and van Rossum and Kernighan and Ritchie are some finite number, so they are infinity-x me.

There are levels where people hit a wall. Some hit it at hello.c, some hit it at writing professional business logic with proper data structures, some hit it at assembly language or programming language design or operating systems.

Anyone in over their head at any level is a 1/10 or a 0.

The superstars of language design, if they had to dive into Java business logic, might be at 2x the productivity of a competent pro...or they might shoot themselves.

But if you create a Python or Linux...what's your productivity compared to that Java programmer? In terms of the market value of those ecosystems, increased efficiency by the developers and users in those ecosystems, it's not 10x, it's gigantic, millions of times the value-add.

The weird thing is, people don't get paid much more when they move from one level to another, unless they start the next Google or get shares/royalties...it's more on a log scale.

Re: There are no 10x developers, but there are 1/10 ones

#27

In my experience there are both. There are certainly a fair number of 1/10ers that manage to progress through seemingly normal career paths as programmers despite not being very good. I've worked with some, and most of you who are also developers probably have as well. But there are also for-real 10xers on top of the baseline. John Carmack, Jeff Dean, Fabrice Bellard, et al. If you define hyper-productive programmers…

> But there are also for-real 10xers on top of the baseline. John Carmack, Jeff Dean, Fabrice Bellard, et al.

Those are the famous ones. Also, a fair portion of Members of Technical Staff (and higher) at Google are 10x.

Re: There are no 10x developers, but there are 1/10 ones

#28
You can't give 10x or 1/10 labels without context. If you ask a smart developer to code in a brand new language, he'll look like a 1/10 developer for a while; and an average developer can look like a 10x developer if he's working with technology that he's been using for the past 10 years.

Re: There are no 10x developers, but there are 1/10 ones

#29
post #2

I think there are 10x developers because the vast majority are 1x.

10x at what? What is 1x?

Programming is a wide field. In some tasks, I'm faster. In others, very slow. Give opportunity to do only the things I'm good (and pay me!) and happy I will. But... I need to do a lot of stuff I'm not good, or is unrelated to programming per se (I'm a solo startup) and sometimes is like the time is stopped...

Post reply on HN