3 ms·
I think this is where the current attitude towards programmers and how we hire them is wrong, or at least a little off-base. A lot of people here seem to look d
by BrandonM 16y ago
I think this is where the current attitude towards programmers and how we hire them is wrong, or at least a little off-base. A lot of people here seem to look down on someone who just works his ass off and gets the job done unless that person has a web presence and a github repository. Why would a guy like this even have a blog? Why would he care about our opinions of him? The contrast is striking between the blogging, coding-a-personal-project nature of our generation of programmers and the get-things-done-efficiently-and-go-have-fun nature of an entirely different generation. Many miss that "completes entire projects by himself" and "razor-like focus" often preclude many of the activities we now expect to see in a good programmer. Many think that if a programmer is not giving something away for free -- likely something that few will use or read -- then he is just a hamster-wheel cubicle drone.
Your comment reminded me that the reality of the programming world is that there are countless unsung amazing programmers who have stuck to the same platform for years, if not decades. They know their IDEs, libraries, and code bases inside and out. They get an assignment, go into crazy-productive genius-coder mode, and get a high quality product out the door. And then they go home and enjoy themselves, and none of us are the wiser. But we sure do appreciate the reliability of our cell phone networks, our vehicle computer systems, and countless other amazing pieces of software that we take for granted. Thanks for reminding us that you can be a great programmer without having a huge following, programming open source, or even working for a startup. Building something people want and getting things done are all that matters.
- corysama 16y agoThey are one with the Tao. http://www.canonical.org/~kragen/tao-of-programming.html http://www.canonical.org/~kragen/tao-of-programming.html
- derefr 16y agoWhen a field is new, its pioneers can be identified easily: they are the ones who are making the field up as they go along. Thus, there is no need for status signaling, because the merit of each individual is very clear: the "alphas" are the Newtons and Shakespeares, having to invent entirely new notations and words just to explain the things they're working on. This is how programming was for the previous generation. When a field matures, and it becomes harder to make true advances on one's own, we lose our ability to easily evaluate objective merit--so we replace objective merit cues with subjective status cues. The "alphas" of a mature field are the ones who signal more, showing that they can afford to waste effort on useless plumage (little-used FOSS project contributions.) Of course, once we have adapted to existence in a mature field, we begin to recognize an overabundance of status cues as "trying too hard," and recognize that those who have true merit might not be bothering with status cues at all: thus is born countersignaling, of the kind these "unsung amazing pogrammers" perform.
- rapind 16y agoSomething I started noticing a few years ago is the amount of hype around marketing as a programmer. Seems like there's a neverending stream of self-help articles discussing the virtues of marketing yourself through blogs, open-source, SEO, etc. Thing is I'm positive this has helped a lot of programmers become far more successful than they otherwise would have been. Unfortunately this also increases the amount of noise in the industry and makes it really hard to find the get it done types. There also seems to be a lot more ego floating around, but my perception on this could just be a side effect of getting old and grumpy.