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

Super-star programmers

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 124 posts

Re: Super-star programmers

#41

Post by fragsworth »

kstenerud wrote: post #35
forgotAgain wrote: post #4

As I reached about half way through the article I got bored and my mind starting having stray thoughts - god this is long. Isn't it ironic that a superstar programmer would have been bored by now and stopped reading. - momentarily after that, I guess I just admitted that I'm not s superstar programmer. - momentarily after that, I wonder if there are writers who can transmit ten times as much information using one ten…

You can achieve faster reading rates with this sort of stuff by only reading one sentence from the middle of each paragraph, or reading the second and last sentence in the rare case that the middle sentence wasn't enough. The content is of such low density that it takes little more than that to decode the meaning and intent of the article.

This is unfortunately true for most web articles and blog posts.

I tend to do this somewhat subconsciously when I start to realize the content is sparse.

Re: Super-star programmers

#43

Post by drharris »

sophacles wrote: post #19
drharris wrote: post #6

Forgive potential ignorance here, but people often quote Joel Spolsky as saying things like: "...the trouble with using a lot of mediocre programmers instead of a couple of good ones is that no matter how long they strive, they will still produce something mediocre." What really genius-level things has Fog Creek done? I remember demoing FogBugz, and it was marginally better than its competitors, but it was far from a…

I think it is always important to consider time-lines on stuff like this. In this field (many fields actually, but it seems especially this one), the first version of something may be revolutionary or particularly good, and then everyone copies that as obvious, making the first one seem only OK or even bad. TV-Tropes covers this effect nicely in the world of fictional television at: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.…

FogBugz arrived when the main player on the scene was BugZilla, and capitalized on the fledgling "AJAX" craze. It was definitely a Bugzilla zapper, and it still remains a quality product to this day, gaining features and maintaining simplicity. It's a quality piece of software, but it's still "only a bug tracker". It wasn't the first of its kind, and it's definitely not the only one these days.

When I think of a rock star, I think of someone who not only produces stuff of quality, but actually changes the landscape of the industry. If FogBugs hires 40 rock star developers, I'd expect to see a lot more come out of them than products all in crowded spaces. While they are all quality products, they aren't changing the landscape of the industries involved.

Re: Super-star programmers

#44

Post by dkersten »

jdlshore wrote: post #29

I'm disappointed to see the 10x programmer meme hit a publication like the Economist. There's no scientific evidence of 10x differences in programmer productivity. To quote Laurent Bossavit [1], who's investigated the studies people like McConnell use: "How strong is the support conferred to the 10x claim by the best-reputed list of references, for a reader persistent enough to follow the chain of citations back to p…

From what I heard the 10x meme came from a study back in the 60's where they timed something like ten programmers programming on punch cards for a couple of hours. Now, I didn't check the facts behind this myself, but if thats the case its hardly scientifically rigorous and hardly relevant at all today.

Re: Super-star programmers

#45

Post by bicknergseng »

forgotAgain wrote: post #4

As I reached about half way through the article I got bored and my mind starting having stray thoughts - god this is long. Isn't it ironic that a superstar programmer would have been bored by now and stopped reading. - momentarily after that, I guess I just admitted that I'm not s superstar programmer. - momentarily after that, I wonder if there are writers who can transmit ten times as much information using one ten…

I stopped reading newspapers years ago when I realized they used a full page article to verbosely repeat the article title. Sadly, 140 characters seems to be the correct length for headline news in a society with no attention span.

Re: Super-star programmers

#46

Post by hack_edu »

vbtemp wrote: post #24
ajross wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm constantly fighting that same urge. The problem is one of domain. UI coding for straightforward data models (which is 90% of all "web" development) just ... isn't very hard or impressive. Great programmers in that regime produce software that is smaller, cleaner, tighter and higher quality. But it's still just a bug database or social thing or web store, etc... Anyone (even mediocre programmers) can look at it an…

Although the article never used the word "super star", it's something I see around HN and the startup world quite a bit.... I sort of snicker when I see startups post jobs looking for "rock star" coders [1]. What self respecting person would call him or herself a "rock star", let alone apply for such a position? Maybe it's just a gimmick to get mediocre developers to get to work on boilerplate web work.. [1] I also s…

When a job listing says ninja/rockstar/badass coder, its really just a codeword for someone they can force to do anything at all costs. They act like they want a 10x'er but really just want someone who they can get to do 10x much work.

Re: Super-star programmers

#47

Post by zainny »

ajross wrote: post #25
vbtemp wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Although the article never used the word "super star", it's something I see around HN and the startup world quite a bit.... I sort of snicker when I see startups post jobs looking for "rock star" coders [1]. What self respecting person would call him or herself a "rock star", let alone apply for such a position? Maybe it's just a gimmick to get mediocre developers to get to work on boilerplate web work.. [1] I also s…

It's just a meme. Some people are into it, some aren't. There are lots of ways to motivate people, and this works for some. I try not to get to wound up over language usage.

I think you have to be a pretty shallow person to be motivated by the idea of being called a rock star programmer.

I specifically do not applied for positions that are advertised in this way.

Re: Super-star programmers

#48

Post by Retric »

jdlshore wrote: post #29

I'm disappointed to see the 10x programmer meme hit a publication like the Economist. There's no scientific evidence of 10x differences in programmer productivity. To quote Laurent Bossavit [1], who's investigated the studies people like McConnell use: "How strong is the support conferred to the 10x claim by the best-reputed list of references, for a reader persistent enough to follow the chain of citations back to p…

Wait, so you have seen 10x variations in productivity but assume because 'bob' is say better able to avoid interruptions that does not mean he is a 10x better programmer? Programming is not just a question of time spent in front of a computer soft skills are important. If someone looks at inconsistent requirements and get's clarification rather than jump into a quagmire without end they are being more productive even if there not writing code at the time.

I think the 10-50x observed increase in productivity is task specific. But, people also deal with a finite list of specific problems so what if bob is 2x as productive on random tasks if there is 10 years worth of work where he can be 10x as productive he is worth a lot more than the average programmer.

Re: Super-star programmers

#49

Post by larrys »

drharris wrote: post #40
larrys wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Forgive potential ignorance here" "Don't get me wrong; I think Joel has a lot of good ideas in general" The saying that comes to mind is perhaps the following. "Those who can, do, those who can't teach." I'm guessing that Joel, by his writings, is a combination of the two and as a result his output is not "rockstar" quality. Another example might be Steve Blank. Who no doubt achieved more fame as a teacher then he e…

Indeed; and my post was never intended to belittle Joel himself. He has provided great value to the industry in both capacities. I'm mainly challenging the notion that if he truly hires only developers he considers to be rockstars, then why doesn't the company have a more compelling domain than bug tracking and PM?

Well that certainly has to do with both business sense as well as the risk taking ability and what he feels comfortable with.

To do something compelling you have to want to take that risk (which could result in spectacular success or failure). Joel might not want to bite off more than he can chew or he simply might not be creative enough to come up with anything "more compelling domain than bug tracking and PM".

That is why a good programmer needs to be around good business people (add: as well as people with ideas and a feel for the marketplace). They are two different skills. Same with medicine. Doctors specialize. You don't find that someone is the best thoracic surgeon and world famous also does urology. Maybe he also dables in photography but he's not going to be as good as Ansel Adams who does it full time. Business is a skill and takes full time attention. So does programming.

Look at PG. Running YC is a full time job. While he can certainly do programming on the side now and maybe write a book you're not going to tell me he can do all three better than a specialist who can devote full attention.

Re: Super-star programmers

#50

Post by presidentender »

I can think of one real, actual, verifiable superstar: Steve Yegge. There are more, but I don't know who they are.

Taking his blogs at face value, and assuming that my sample size of 1 is enough, here's what I've got:

"Superstars" get things done because they get things done. They may be ADD in their multitude of projects or in their personal lives, but while they're producing, they produce. They don't fuck around on reddit while they're coding. They might screw around interminably at other times - they might work only a few hours a day - but while they work, they're working, and that's it.

They also get things done because they understand what the hell's going on, at least one or two layers of abstraction below the one they're officially working on. Stevey claims that his understanding stops at transistors - transistors are black boxes, but he gets what has to happen at the layers of abstraction above that, from the machine code to the guts of the interpreter.

Particularly delicious? Steve Yegge worked at Geoworks (http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2008/05/dynamic-languages-st...), and he attributes their defeat by the likes of Microsoft not to superior marketing, but to the value of abstractions.

Post reply on HN