3 ms·
I was hoping for something more concrete. For instance, consider that terrible programmers stay in the job market for a long time, so you may encounter them mor
by makuro 16y ago
I was hoping for something more concrete. For instance, consider that terrible programmers stay in the job market for a long time, so you may encounter them more often. Also, if you're not doing your own recruitment, non-technical, keyword-seeking recruiters can be a hindrance to finding good people.
This post just seems to be emphatically reasking the question "Really, guys? Really??"
- philcrissman 16y agoBut "Really?" is actually a very good question; it's an appeal to common sense. Do we all work at places where only 1% of the programmers can actually program? I know I haven't... even when I just started and was clearly the least experienced person on the team, I could still get things done...
- japherwocky 16y ago+1 for the concrete thing. Spolsky was using real numbers from real experience with real applicants, but this article seems to be pure speculation and anecdote. The author is saying, "Well, my personal experience doesn't match up with this so it must be inaccurate."
- gvb 16y agoCitation? I'm serious - I looked but could not find an article with real numbers. The one linked in the OP http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2005/01/27.html http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2005/01/27.html is using made up numbers. Joel actually has a pretty good theory - the same 199 incompetents plus one good programmer apply to all job openings. The good programmer gets hired and the other 199 flock to the next job opening. Occam's razor selects that explanation.
- japherwocky 16y agohm, actually I might be wrong. Shame on me for trusting my memory. :) Double flame then! Someone give us some real statistics!