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

Not a real engineer (2019)

twitchard.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–86 of 86 posts

Re: Not a real engineer (2019)

#81

Post by exclusiv »

uguuo_o wrote: post #29
exclusiv wrote: post #26

I just recently got into Steve Howe. He's considered one of, if not the best guitarist of all time and I came across a quote he had that said something like he wished guitarists would focus on being musicians. Same thing as coders to engineers. I've come across more technically able programmers than I am. But they aren't better engineers. And a lot of that is because I'm an entrepreneur and have a marketing secondary…

Just a minor note. Howe is good, one of the best yes, but Paco De Lucia reigns far above them all.

I'm not familiar with Paco so thanks for sharing.

I looked up Howe and he said this about Paco:

"There was mention of Paco de Lucía, who is the greatest, well, if not the greatest ever flamenco guitarist. Many people love him dearly as I do, and if somebody says, 'Can you play like Paco?' I say, 'No, no.' [laughs] So I just jumped on board, and it was wonderful. Very nice people." [1]

Howe made up a flamenco piece on the spot for a Queen song so he was talking about Paco then.

The nod is there by the man himself for the greatest flamenco guitarist.

But if you discuss something that is basically subjective, you still need criteria because if one person is saying oh Paco is the most technically skilled that's one thing. Another would be more akin to how the Decathalon decides the greatest athlete.

I don't know if Howe is the best ever, but if there was a Decathalon equivalent for guitarists, I'd bet Howe would top Paco no problem. And in that event, he'd top Jimi Hendrix and Page too. But that's just my benchmark, having range and full command of the discipline.

[1] https://www.ultimate-guitar.com/news/general_music_news/yes_...

Re: Not a real engineer (2019)

#82

Post by cxr »

ido wrote: post #74
ponector wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I said x1.5 of their peers. Meaning you will fire first other half of your developers. Also, you may not keep, but there are million of other managers who will be happy to have someone reliable even at x0.9 performance.

Sure but in my original example the “1x” guy was not actually an acceptable performer. I just meant someone great could easily be 5x better, not that 1x is the average (their average peer would be >>1x). I’ve learned from experience that it’s not worth compromising on a mediocre developer (even if in some situations I’d have to). Better take the short-term hit of trying to find someone good. Also the 5x ones would mo…

> but in my original example the “1x” guy was not actually an acceptable performer

It actually was. You said so yourself:

> perform “adequately” (the project got made to acceptable level)

You need to figure out whether you're talking about someone who is acceptable or not.

Re: Not a real engineer (2019)

#84

Post by shermantanktop »

ursakhiin wrote: post #80
rewmie wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> FizzBuzz is a trivial technical problem (...) No, it is not. The term fizzbuzz doesn't refer explicitly to the loop with the modulus example. Fizzbuzz is an umbrella term for tests that are used to assess proficiency, but in practice they tend to have weird gotchas that get you disqualified for random reasons. Case in point, there are online coding challenge tests where you do fizzbuzz tests that flag you as disqua…

Why wouldn't FizzBuzz refer explicitly to the challenge that shares its name?

I said “FizzBuzz-level.” I’ve used actual FizzBuzz for new grads who I suspected couldn’t code, but normally I’m using questions that require looping, conditional logic, perhaps the use of a simple helper data structure like a map. I consider “reverse a string” to be advanced FizzBuzz. Anything requiring DFS or binary search is not FizzBuzz. “Print a tic tac toe board using asterisks, one character at a time” is FizzBuzz.

Re: Not a real engineer (2019)

#86

Post by ido »

cxr wrote: post #82
ido wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure but in my original example the “1x” guy was not actually an acceptable performer. I just meant someone great could easily be 5x better, not that 1x is the average (their average peer would be >>1x). I’ve learned from experience that it’s not worth compromising on a mediocre developer (even if in some situations I’d have to). Better take the short-term hit of trying to find someone good. Also the 5x ones would mo…

> but in my original example the “1x” guy was not actually an acceptable performer It actually was. You said so yourself: > perform “adequately” (the project got made to acceptable level) You need to figure out whether you're talking about someone who is acceptable or not.

Did you notice the quote marks around adequately? We managed to hobble along but it was obviously not going great. "It wasn't catastrophic" isn't my goal. I want stuff to go really well, not just about enough to not go out of business/not be in violation of contractual obligations (with a lot of slack getting picked up by their better performing peers).

Again it depends if you have an alternative, in my experience I always had it was just sometimes costly/inopportune/a pain in the ass in the short term to find someone better. Long term it was always better (I never regretted firing someone too quickly but often regretted firing someone too late).

I was also always worried about team morale but every time a low performer was fired it actually improved morale.

Post reply on HN