4 ms·

This is not garbage. It's just a fact of life that some people are better than others in a professional environment, often in multiple ways, taking everything y

This is not garbage. It's just a fact of life that some people are better than others in a professional environment, often in multiple ways, taking everything you say into account. As everything else in life its priority and effort mixed in with a bit of affinity. Not everyone want to put in the effort and time to become top tier in their profession: those who do obviously become better than those who don't.

0xBA5ED 8y ago
It is garbage. It's an arrogant mental shortcut that has little predictive value and encourages a dismissive attitude towards people in general. The fact that people are better and worse at certain things is beside the point. If you're going to categorize people, there are better ways to do it.
- Reelin 8y ago
  I agree with you and would like to add that this sort of thinking is typical elitism. Such simplified models utterly fail to account for all the inconvenient complications of real life and thus do far more harm than good when acted upon. Consider what happens if the project being hired for is unexpectedly canceled soon after hiring. Or internal politics and personality conflicts end up being an issue. It doesn't take much turnover at all to completely change the dynamics of a team, regardless of whether or not all the replacements are equally skilled. Teams are complex systems. Such mental shortcuts provide a false sense of knowledge (and usually superiority) for those who otherwise fail to understand the logistic and social complexities involved. Real life isn't an RPG with a level system; the fact that this even needs to be pointed out to otherwise intelligent and well educated people is outrageous.
rightbyte 8y ago
It's pretty much garbage, with a self proclaimed truism not supported by data, like interviewing in generall. I can't tell the elite 5% programmers from the 70%+ percentile programmers, or what ever numbers I make up, during the interview process anyway. It's maybe possible to spot rock buttom programmers from the best, but telling a mediocre programmer (50th percentile) from a really bad is probably really hard. Interviewing resembles dating. Spam untill you suceed if you cant be picky.

0xBA5ED 8y ago

It is garbage. It's an arrogant mental shortcut that has little predictive value and encourages a dismissive attitude towards people in general. The fact that people are better and worse at certain things is beside the point. If you're going to categorize people, there are better ways to do it.

Reelin 8y ago
I agree with you and would like to add that this sort of thinking is typical elitism. Such simplified models utterly fail to account for all the inconvenient complications of real life and thus do far more harm than good when acted upon. Consider what happens if the project being hired for is unexpectedly canceled soon after hiring. Or internal politics and personality conflicts end up being an issue. It doesn't take much turnover at all to completely change the dynamics of a team, regardless of whether or not all the replacements are equally skilled. Teams are complex systems. Such mental shortcuts provide a false sense of knowledge (and usually superiority) for those who otherwise fail to understand the logistic and social complexities involved. Real life isn't an RPG with a level system; the fact that this even needs to be pointed out to otherwise intelligent and well educated people is outrageous.

rightbyte 8y ago

It's pretty much garbage, with a self proclaimed truism not supported by data, like interviewing in generall. I can't tell the elite 5% programmers from the 70%+ percentile programmers, or what ever numbers I make up, during the interview process anyway. It's maybe possible to spot rock buttom programmers from the best, but telling a mediocre programmer (50th percentile) from a really bad is probably really hard. Interviewing resembles dating. Spam untill you suceed if you cant be picky.