10X Programmer and Other Software Engineering Myths • Hacker News Board

Re: 10X Programmer and Other Software Engineering Myths

#41

Post by sz4kerto » Tue, Mar 31, 2015, 1:47 PM UTC

jasode wrote: post #15

>these papers did not actually bring any original evidence in support of the notion that some programmers are 10X better than others, [...] What I’ve been saying is that the data is not actually there, so we do not have any strong proof of the actual claim. I can agree with the specific observation that there is no consensus on concrete quantifiable data to prove "10x" with mathematical rigor. Ok, let's set aside "10…

Because they are people who found their places where they can strive. Hire Carmack into an accounting software GUI dev position, and you probably won't see a 1000% advantage compared to his peers.

In some other situations/environments he might be even worse than his peers.

Right people, right place, right time, right behavior.

Re: 10X Programmer and Other Software Engineering Myths

#42

Post by ilitirit » Tue, Mar 31, 2015, 1:47 PM UTC

This is really one of the stupidest ideas that have arisen in this industry in recent memory. I wonder if other industries consider hard-working, intelligent and talented people to be 10x-ers.

10x chef

10x receptionist

10x writer

10x mechanic

SMH...

Re: 10X Programmer and Other Software Engineering Myths

#43

Post by icebraining » Tue, Mar 31, 2015, 1:49 PM UTC

Delmania wrote: post #33

jasode wrote: post #15

>these papers did not actually bring any original evidence in support of the notion that some programmers are 10X better than others, [...] What I’ve been saying is that the data is not actually there, so we do not have any strong proof of the actual claim. I can agree with the specific observation that there is no consensus on concrete quantifiable data to prove "10x" with mathematical rigor. Ok, let's set aside "10…

"If they are a league above other average programmers, what's an acceptable description that you'd use?" Dedicated. These individuals have mastered their domain; they have spent years learning and practicing. They have built knowledge and skills that can be transferred to other domains. I think people need to stop focusing on the label, and start focusing on the process. I don't believe a person is born a 10X program…

But aren't some people born more disciplined?

Re: 10X Programmer and Other Software Engineering Myths

#44

Post by andrewtbham » Tue, Mar 31, 2015, 1:50 PM UTC

I don't think people realize how rare 10x programmers are. If you read the book iWoz, you will realize Steve Wozniak was definitely 10x more productive than other programmers. He was doing stuff it would have taken other people years to figure out. I think it's really on the bleeding edge where the 10x productivity shows.

In 1997 I think I could have done a web site 10x faster than most people, because I had been obsessed with it. At this point that's no longer true. Right now there are people that can do machine learning stuff 10x faster than other people because they are obsessed. Because they are experts and deeper into the 10,000 hours it takes to become an expert. The phenomena is more like that book outliers.

Re: 10X Programmer and Other Software Engineering Myths

#45

Post by chrisreed212 » Tue, Mar 31, 2015, 1:50 PM UTC

x1024 wrote: post #8

mberning wrote: post #3

I love these videos, but the production values are terrible. Invest in a good camera and microphone setup.

Or at the very least move your headphone-mounted microphone near your mouth.

And pick audio codec settings carefully - it sounded to me like excess audio compression artefacts. Gave up after 30 seconds as the audio was so bad.

Re: 10X Programmer and Other Software Engineering Myths

#46

Post by Swizec » Tue, Mar 31, 2015, 1:51 PM UTC

sz4kerto wrote: post #41

jasode wrote: post #15

>these papers did not actually bring any original evidence in support of the notion that some programmers are 10X better than others, [...] What I’ve been saying is that the data is not actually there, so we do not have any strong proof of the actual claim. I can agree with the specific observation that there is no consensus on concrete quantifiable data to prove "10x" with mathematical rigor. Ok, let's set aside "10…

Because they are people who found their places where they can strive. Hire Carmack into an accounting software GUI dev position, and you probably won't see a 1000% advantage compared to his peers. In some other situations/environments he might be even worse than his peers. Right people, right place, right time, right behavior.

Hence why it's been a social faux pas for the last 10+ years to tell a non-hire anything other than "We're not a match".

Re: 10X Programmer and Other Software Engineering Myths

#47

Post by zzzcpan » Tue, Mar 31, 2015, 1:51 PM UTC

  > So this is the notion that there is a 10 fold 
  > difference between productivity and quality 
  > of work between different programmers with 
  > the same amount of experience. 
  > Is this fact or fiction?

One thing everyone forgets: there's never the same amount of experience. Different people have different experience and therefore perform differently on things, where difference in experience matters. So, obviously there could be even a 100 fold difference.

Re: 10X Programmer and Other Software Engineering Myths

#48

Post by rewqfdsa » Tue, Mar 31, 2015, 1:52 PM UTC

Bullshit. If there are no 10x programmers in your group, it's because your group is tiny, you can't hire 10x programmers, or because you're stifling your 10x programmers with bureaucracy.

Re: 10X Programmer and Other Software Engineering Myths

#49

Post by vonmoltke » Tue, Mar 31, 2015, 1:52 PM UTC

RogerL wrote: post #28

jasode wrote: post #15

>these papers did not actually bring any original evidence in support of the notion that some programmers are 10X better than others, [...] What I’ve been saying is that the data is not actually there, so we do not have any strong proof of the actual claim. I can agree with the specific observation that there is no consensus on concrete quantifiable data to prove "10x" with mathematical rigor. Ok, let's set aside "10…

I agree. It is a handy catch phrase that describes a real phenomenon. I tend to think in terms of variance. Programmer A is 3 standard deviations 'better' than programmer B (again, no mathematical rigor implied!!!). Think of it in this way. Most of us are smart people, and learned relativity in high school or college. Those that didn't, could have. It ain't that hard . But how many could have discovered relativity at…

The problem is that there may be a domain you can drop Jessica and Jacob into where they become equivalent, or even flip-flop.

My problem with the myth is the part that posits there are a bunch of programmers you can drop on anything and have them be more productive than the average. They exist, but they are very rare, just like Einstein-caliber scientists are very rare. In fact, you connected "10X" with "six-sigma"; that is about 4/1,000,000.

> To anyone that disagrees, why all the hand wringing about hiring? Just hire anyone that crosses your door, they will be fine, right?

I have complained many times in the past about the hand-wringing. I think you are creating a false dichotomy between hiring "10Xers" and hiring anybody. There is a gaping chasm between those positions, and in my opinion the proper place to set your bar depends on a serious assessment of your company and your needs. In this context the demand for "10X" engineers comes off at best as hiring voodoo and at worst as an excuse to not hire anybody like the company principals.

Re: 10X Programmer and Other Software Engineering Myths

#50

Post by crdoconnor » Tue, Mar 31, 2015, 1:52 PM UTC

RogerL wrote: post #28

jasode wrote: post #15

>these papers did not actually bring any original evidence in support of the notion that some programmers are 10X better than others, [...] What I’ve been saying is that the data is not actually there, so we do not have any strong proof of the actual claim. I can agree with the specific observation that there is no consensus on concrete quantifiable data to prove "10x" with mathematical rigor. Ok, let's set aside "10…

I agree. It is a handy catch phrase that describes a real phenomenon. I tend to think in terms of variance. Programmer A is 3 standard deviations 'better' than programmer B (again, no mathematical rigor implied!!!). Think of it in this way. Most of us are smart people, and learned relativity in high school or college. Those that didn't, could have. It ain't that hard . But how many could have discovered relativity at…

I find the 10x difference in productivity isn't usually that evident in singular tasks that a reasonable programmer could complete in a day or less. A difference of 2-3x there is more normal, whereas 10x would be exceptional.

A long, drawn out project is where real productivity difference will become evident though. Developers who don't mire themselves in technical debt can easily become 10x (or more) productive than those who don't.