3 ms·
I think it depends on the need of the company. I’m reminded of Joel Spolsky’s “smart and gets shit done” adage (and then book): type 1 is smart, and you want so
by zamfi 5y ago
I think it depends on the need of the company. I’m reminded of Joel Spolsky’s “smart and gets shit done” adage (and then book): type 1 is smart, and you want some of these people.
But you don’t want people who, then faced with a task that can take 3 hours-and has been given time pressure that requires it to take 3 hours—instead spend 12 hours because they can’t live with the ambiguity of being uncertain that they’re using locks the right way.
The approach described in part 2 is highly opportunistic. You generally want to hire staff who can be opportunistic when necessary, even if that is not always the right approach.
- ip26 5y agoIronically I would argue concurrency is the ONE place where a gnawing intolerance of ambiguity might actually be a good thing ;) (As broken concurrency is one of the worst forms of Heisenbug)
- underdeserver 5y agoExactly. Type 2s are great at getting things done, but the team's going to have to wake up at 3 AM on a weekend because of random errors.
- zamfi 5y agoPerhaps. But for some companies, the occasional 3am page is worth the tradeoff for development to happen (at least in this reading) 4x faster.
- underdeserver 5y agoIt's also not 4x faster. It's only 4x faster at the very beginning, until all the weird bugs get in the way and everyone's too scared to make changes because every little change breaks the customer experience.
- underdeserver 5y agoAlso, maybe it's worth it for the company (I still don't think so), but it's not worth it for the engineers :)
- zamfi 5y agoSpoken like a die-hard Type 1. :)
- therealdrag0 5y agoI tend to be more of a type1. I recently read a blogpost with some mental tools for not getting bogged down (the whole series is good). https://www.cold-takes.com/useful-vices-for-wicked-problems/ https://www.cold-takes.com/useful-vices-for-wicked-problems/