> .. and they're not really describing the same things I'd apply this to the other end of your argument too. The reason there's wild disagreement, i.e. "too ma

> .. and they're not really describing the same things I'd apply this to the other end of your argument too. The reason there's wild disagreement, i.e. "too many programmers, or not enough" is that they're talking about very different things. There is no linear scale between "can't code" and "great programmer". Anyone smart enough to be a great programmer should understand very well that no system is that simple; especially one involving people. On the personality side, you have pioneers, early adopters, people who are comfortable being in the wild, out of their depth... and you have town planners, who like to optimise systems they understand already... and in the middle settlers, who are best when taking innovations and promoting them to a wider audience. In a large software organisation you need ALL THREE types, because they all fulfil important functions. There are similar differences in terms of learning style, ambition, network, experience, confidence, bias, and luck. Putting people into buckets like this is ill-advised.