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

Why are so many successful founding CEOs software engineers?

iism.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 365 posts

Re: Why are so many successful founding CEOs software engineers?

#251

Post by DC1350 »

bluefirebrand wrote: post #236
crispyambulance wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> there is not a serious place on earth that would let me touch their codebase. It depends on what you mean by "serious". Software development is very much a free-for-all as far as backgrounds go. It attracts people from all disciplines. There are NO CREDENTIALS needed to be called a "software engineer", and it will remain this way for the foreseeable future. Every organization that develops software has its own rule…

> There are NO CREDENTIALS needed to be called a "software engineer" In the USA, maybe that's true. In Canada, for instance, there are legal requirements to being able to call yourself an Engineer. That's why "Software Developer" is used.

In theory. Nobody actually listens to or cares about these guidelines.

Re: Why are so many successful founding CEOs software engineers?

#252

Post by diab0lic »

ls65536 wrote: post #196
WrtCdEvrydy wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I have an undergraduate degree in CS, but I got it 16 years ago and then went to law school, and there is not a serious place on earth that would let me touch their codebase Interestingly, you might be wrong. There's a continuing push to get people in the industry who can code for startups wanting to disrupt the space. You'd probably be the lawyer who can code and any lawyer-adjacent tech company would love you. Wh…

I don't remember where I read this (possibly even on HN at some point), but this reminds me of an interesting idea that has stuck with me over time... Consider two broad but otherwise generally viewed as unrelated (however, not mutually exclusive) skillsets: A and B. Lots of people are great at A and lots of people are great at B, but the intersection of the two is generally small (perhaps "law" and "programming" cou…

Was it “Being the (Pareto) Best in the World”? [0]

[0] https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/XvN2QQpKTuEzgkZHY/being-the-...

Re: Why are so many successful founding CEOs software engineers?

#253

Post by Jenk »

theflyinghorse wrote: post #250
Jenk wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that holds any weight. See this example I just picked off a search: https://careers.microsoft.com/us/en/job/958535/Software-Engi...

That's an Americansim in a job posting. Likely the company wants to use the same language in US as well as in Canada. Noone I know in Canada is called Software Engineer, we all refer to ourselves as Software Developer.

I'd be fascinated to know more.

FWIW the UK has a similar thing for traditional Engineer roles. Nobody is legally permitted to call themselves a "tradtional" Engineer (such as Civil, Aerospace, Aeronautical, etc.) without, typically, at minimum a bachelor's degree or equivalent vocational training in that discipline. These are deemed "protected" roles but they are very specific - i.e. there needs to be some kind of auhtoritative body that wards the title(s). "Software Engineer" has no such protection. Generic/non-descript "Engineer" isn't protected. There are plenty of "Software Engineer" roles and it's entirely feasible to be hired as a SWE before you even get any higher education at all. Most of my previous roles have officially been documented as "(Junior/Senior/Lead/etc) Software Engineer" on my contract(s) of employment.

Re: Why are so many successful founding CEOs software engineers?

#254

Post by the_local_host »

tw04 wrote: post #201
Number157 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Google/Alphabet's current CEO Current, sure, but he showed up after Google was already successful. Becoming the CEO of Google made him successful, but he didn't make Google successful. > Apple's current CEO... Same thing. > Jobs, the founding CEO, was also not a software engineer. True but he co-founded it with a software engineer (Wozniak) who was arguably influential enough that he had the influence of a CEO if n…

>Current, sure, but he showed up after Google was already successful. Becoming the CEO of Google made him successful, but he didn't make Google successful. And the previous CEO of Google was Eric Schmidt, also not a software developer, and successful before taking the role at google. >True but he co-founded it with a software engineer (Wozniak) who was arguably influential enough that he had the influence of a CEO if…

The software Eric Schmidt co-wrote in the 1970s (Lex) was used for decades. For all I know people still rely on it.

Re: Why are so many successful founding CEOs software engineers?

#255

Post by asdfman123 »

isamuel wrote: post #109

All of the people on this list are "software engineers" in the sense that they have some rudimentary education in the field. Almost none of them could get a job as a software engineer at their own company, if they had to, because they would be completely unqualified. And I'm not looking down my nose at anyone: I have an undergraduate degree in CS, but I got it 16 years ago and then went to law school, and there is no…

I'm not an expert, but my feeling is you'd need just three things to get back into Big Tech:

1) At least a year or two of experience at another programming job, 2) MONTHS of time studying whiteboarding, and maybe 3) A few good referrals.

I know, because I'm 34 and I have 9 years of enterprise experience. I'm trying to get into Big Tech right now (I've interviewed with Google and Amazon and I'm about to do Facebook). I'm lucky though that I have an undergrad science degree from Stanford, so I have at least some credibility in that world and many of my former peers are in that space.

The only really hard part is finding the will to study leetcode problems for hours.

I have all sorts of thoughts on the subconscious motivations behind the whiteboard grind. It's sort of a hazing ritual. Or, like so many things in America, a class filter initially designed to not be a class filter: rich people can afford to study for months for free. Poor people can't.

But ultimately, it's helpful to think of it as a game. Either play it or don't. There's no point in trying to resist it if my goal is ultimately to succeed personally. I keep getting rejected from Big Tech, but local firms are THROWING job offers at me just for being a decent, experienced programmer. I don't have much to complain about, other than the fact that I'd sort of like to make $400k for a little while and then drop out of society for a year or two.

And I think the large majority of people realize leetcode != software engineering ability. They're just trading off a low false positive rate for a high false negative rate. My wife has also been spending months studying for the LSAT. It's really quite similar except I can work as programmer without formal credentials.

Re: Why are so many successful founding CEOs software engineers?

#257

Post by smnrchrds »

pydry wrote: post #110
GCA10 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So true! Around 1980, chemical and petroleum engineers made the best CEOs, because oil prices were high and energy companies had the highest stock-market valuations. Around 1990 Japanese finance majors made the best CEOs, because the Japanese financial markets were near their peak and Japanese bank stocks were highly valued.

This might be true but I don't see why it is obvious, especially when it's not even commonly assumed that the best person to run a software company is a software engineer.

The article only considers founding CEOs. Tech founders are mostly software majors.

Re: Why are so many successful founding CEOs software engineers?

#258

Post by jbroson »

danielmarkbruce wrote: post #149
onion2k wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Almost none of them could get a job as a software engineer at their own company, if they had to, because they would be completely unqualified. There are 10 CEO level people mentioned. Woz could certainly get a job at Apple. He's clearly brilliant and capable. Larry & Sergey could definitely get jobs at Google. They were PhD CS students at Stanford (how on Earth is that "unqualified" to you?). Zuckerberg could get a j…

You are assuming a lot. Many stanford phd's fail the google interview. I'd guess larry, sergey and zuckerberg had a pretty good chance of failing their own swe interviews...

What? You honestly think the Stanford PhDs who created Google couldn't get hired as basic SWEs? Seriously? I mean if true that says a lot more about the SWE interviews than it does about Stanford PhDs.

I mean there are Yale JDs that fail the bar exam but no one would claim that the average Yale JD couldn't get hired as a Big Law associate or judicial clerk.

Re: Why are so many successful founding CEOs software engineers?

#259

Post by jbroson »

tinco wrote: post #160
onion2k wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am assuming a lot, but everything I've read about Larry, Sergey and Zuck tells me that they're pretty exceptional people (even if that doesn't extend to their coding ability, which I have no idea about). They're people who are driven, focused and hugely ambitious. If they don't have what it takes to pass a SWE interview then there's little hope for the rest of us.

I think the point is, that even if they are intelligent and capable and definitely contributed a lot to their initial codebases ( I don't know why you singled out Gates, but he most certainly did as well), all of these companies grew to the point where almost any code change requires a bunch of expertise with technologies that they probably have not been exposed to. I don't know if they wouldn't get hired, I mean it'…

If this is the standard that "they couldn't get hired TODAY" I'm sure that's not a very interesting fact worth discussing.

I mean if we reanimated Big Al Einstein today and he had a blind interview for a tenure track physics position at Princeton Physics dept he would probably fail. The field has changed too much although with months of prep he'd be able to catch up, the same as L & S could for SWE interviews.

Re: Why are so many successful founding CEOs software engineers?

#260

Post by walto2 »

jbroson wrote: post #258
danielmarkbruce wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are assuming a lot. Many stanford phd's fail the google interview. I'd guess larry, sergey and zuckerberg had a pretty good chance of failing their own swe interviews...

What? You honestly think the Stanford PhDs who created Google couldn't get hired as basic SWEs? Seriously? I mean if true that says a lot more about the SWE interviews than it does about Stanford PhDs. I mean there are Yale JDs that fail the bar exam but no one would claim that the average Yale JD couldn't get hired as a Big Law associate or judicial clerk.

In a very literal sense, that's exactly what's broken about the interview process in the software industry. The philosophy is to avoid false positives at all costs, so a high rate of false negatives is seen as OK. The prevailing advice is, just try your luck again in six months.
Post reply on HN