5 ms·

I’ve worked with people who could have written this post with the stats and how they consider themselves, but they were awful to work with. People didn’t challe

I’ve worked with people who could have written this post with the stats and how they consider themselves, but they were awful to work with. People didn’t challenge them because it was exhausting, because they knew best, despite their constant churning out of garbage code that the business didn’t have the guts to address. That’s not to say you’re bad or your code is bad, but it’s definitely worth considering whether the way you’re measuring yourself is a true reflection of your value: have you talked to your co-workers about what it’s like to work with you? What value you provide to them? How you can contribute to their careers, their work? The greatest value you can deliver to a business is rarely code: if you can improve every other developer by 1x, the business will be much better off than you being on an island all by yourself. My measure of myself always starts with whether or not people enjoy working with me, whether I’m providing value to the people around me: I could write 10x as much code as I do now, but I don’t believe it would have better results for the company overall.

aprinsen 4y ago
The situation OP described is really not that unbelievable to me. I've met one or two developers who really were "the best in the room" at a smaller company and I can imagine them writing something like this. Nobody hated them. The 70/30 balance seems relatively lopsided though.
MauranKilom 4y ago
> People didn’t challenge them because it was exhausting, because they knew best, despite their constant churning out of garbage code that the business didn’t have the guts to address. That doesn't square with how people are going out of their way to query OP though, no? If people drag you into meetings tangential to your work, it seems unlikely that they hate working with you...
- phphphphp 4y ago
  Difficult to say without knowing the OP personally, but in my experience, all of this can square. There’s complex dynamics at play that are a product of the genius developer mythology: someone produces a lot of code, the system becomes an extension of that person, everyone becomes dependent upon that person regardless of whether the person is good or bad, enjoyable to work with or not, because they’re the genius system-whisperer. Earlier this year I spent some time at a company that has an incomprehensible system that is deeply problematic and painful to work on — so much so, they brought on dozens of developers to try and speed up the rate of delivery (I was one of them) — but the person who built it (and is most productive in it) has been elevated into a position where he now owns the entire technical implementation for the company, and is responsible for designing the solution to the nightmare he created, despite clearly demonstrating he has no business doing so: he’s simultaneously a linchpin and incompetent. There’s probably some version of the Peter Principle that applies to software engineering: a software engineer’s output will rise to the level where it’s a burden.
  - 100011_100001 4y ago
    This is a fair criticism and concern. Part of the reason why I made this post is I can sense internally that I'm starting to lean on the whole "I know this thing better than you", which actually scares me. If I'm thinking it, I'm probably sub-communicating it. Both this reply and your original one are solid thoughts. > someone produces a lot of code, the system becomes an extension of that person, everyone becomes dependent upon that person regardless of whether the person is good or bad, enjoyable to work with or not, because they’re the genius system-whisperer. I hope this is not true for myself, but your logic is sound. I see the truth in it, I just hope it's not the truth. You gave me something to reflect on.
    - jv22222 4y ago
      > I know this thing better than you Whenever I hand code over I ask, does it make sense? Usually they say something like, yep looks easy. I used to think it was because I was a dumb ass and only wrote simple stuff, but finally realized it's because I spend large effort on making the code read like english. (Good function names, good variable names, code that looks like logical short sentences, etc.) All this to say, if you make code it's own wiki, you can avoid "I know this thing better than you" quite effectively, and complex code can be made to seem quite simple. You may already doing that, but thought I'd share in case it's helpful in any way!
  - deltaonefour 4y ago
    This is how it is at every company. The older developers create the universe new developers need to figure out. ON average newer developers don't perform as well as the older ones. This effect is highly correlated by the complexity of the code base.
    - ratww 4y ago
      I feel like that's the only measured answer. This is normal. The thing that affects the team the most in this case is the complexity of the code base. A lot of comments are blaming speed for a supposed lack of sophistication, excessive duplication or disorganisation of the code. But sometimes a developer can be fast is due to someone not introducing unnecessary complexity in the codebase. A fast developer is not necessarily a 10x developer, but it also isn't making a mess. Most of the cases of unmanageable code were made by developers with a lot of time and planning on their hands.
Andrew_nenakhov 4y ago
From my experience, a person claiming to be a 10x developer probably isn't one. All real performers I knew were pretty humble people.
- gamblor956 4y ago
  To second that, the best programmers I know are quite upfront about how much they don't know. This can have the paradoxical effect of people relying on them less in situations where they should, because they think the 10x doesn't know anything, and instead they turn to the braggart 1/10x programmer who claims he knows everything. (Not meaning the OP on this; I just know a guy IRL who is exactly this.)
  - leaflets2 4y ago
    Mistaking confidence for competence. (It seems to me, though, that OP is both competent and reasonably confident, a good combination.)
- jslaby 4y ago
  Like someone saying they're an alpha male... imo most devs, junior or not would love to tackle problems without the oversight of a lead. Maybe his code reviews are so heavy handed that devs would rather get his okay before rather than getting scorched after.
- xpe 4y ago
  I wonder if this is based on a statistical summary over your experience. What does your confusion matrix [1] look like? Also: (1) It is easy to say "from my experience" without sampling from it representatively. (2) It can be difficult, in general, to gather life experience that is balanced across all four elements of the confusion matrix. (This is a general statement that includes survivorship bias.) [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confusion_matrix https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confusion_matrix
gray_50 4y ago
I agree with this. Worked with a guy who sounds exactly like OP. The official perception was that he was a smart 10x engineer. But off the record people actually hated working with him. He was a massive control freak and the only reason we bought anything up with him was so he didn't have a cry about it later. Sometimes the "10x engineer" is just the one that's loudest and most persistent. Doesn't mean they're good. Just means no one else can be fucked dealing with them.
seattle_spring 4y ago
That is spot on to what I was thinking. I have encountered a few of these guys in my career and ohhhh man do they ever think they're the absolute best.

aprinsen 4y ago

The situation OP described is really not that unbelievable to me. I've met one or two developers who really were "the best in the room" at a smaller company and I can imagine them writing something like this. Nobody hated them. The 70/30 balance seems relatively lopsided though.

MauranKilom 4y ago

> People didn’t challenge them because it was exhausting, because they knew best, despite their constant churning out of garbage code that the business didn’t have the guts to address. That doesn't square with how people are going out of their way to query OP though, no? If people drag you into meetings tangential to your work, it seems unlikely that they hate working with you...

phphphphp 4y ago
Difficult to say without knowing the OP personally, but in my experience, all of this can square. There’s complex dynamics at play that are a product of the genius developer mythology: someone produces a lot of code, the system becomes an extension of that person, everyone becomes dependent upon that person regardless of whether the person is good or bad, enjoyable to work with or not, because they’re the genius system-whisperer. Earlier this year I spent some time at a company that has an incomprehensible system that is deeply problematic and painful to work on — so much so, they brought on dozens of developers to try and speed up the rate of delivery (I was one of them) — but the person who built it (and is most productive in it) has been elevated into a position where he now owns the entire technical implementation for the company, and is responsible for designing the solution to the nightmare he created, despite clearly demonstrating he has no business doing so: he’s simultaneously a linchpin and incompetent. There’s probably some version of the Peter Principle that applies to software engineering: a software engineer’s output will rise to the level where it’s a burden.
- 100011_100001 4y ago
  This is a fair criticism and concern. Part of the reason why I made this post is I can sense internally that I'm starting to lean on the whole "I know this thing better than you", which actually scares me. If I'm thinking it, I'm probably sub-communicating it. Both this reply and your original one are solid thoughts. > someone produces a lot of code, the system becomes an extension of that person, everyone becomes dependent upon that person regardless of whether the person is good or bad, enjoyable to work with or not, because they’re the genius system-whisperer. I hope this is not true for myself, but your logic is sound. I see the truth in it, I just hope it's not the truth. You gave me something to reflect on.
  - jv22222 4y ago
    > I know this thing better than you Whenever I hand code over I ask, does it make sense? Usually they say something like, yep looks easy. I used to think it was because I was a dumb ass and only wrote simple stuff, but finally realized it's because I spend large effort on making the code read like english. (Good function names, good variable names, code that looks like logical short sentences, etc.) All this to say, if you make code it's own wiki, you can avoid "I know this thing better than you" quite effectively, and complex code can be made to seem quite simple. You may already doing that, but thought I'd share in case it's helpful in any way!
- deltaonefour 4y ago
  This is how it is at every company. The older developers create the universe new developers need to figure out. ON average newer developers don't perform as well as the older ones. This effect is highly correlated by the complexity of the code base.
  - ratww 4y ago
    I feel like that's the only measured answer. This is normal. The thing that affects the team the most in this case is the complexity of the code base. A lot of comments are blaming speed for a supposed lack of sophistication, excessive duplication or disorganisation of the code. But sometimes a developer can be fast is due to someone not introducing unnecessary complexity in the codebase. A fast developer is not necessarily a 10x developer, but it also isn't making a mess. Most of the cases of unmanageable code were made by developers with a lot of time and planning on their hands.

Andrew_nenakhov 4y ago

From my experience, a person claiming to be a 10x developer probably isn't one. All real performers I knew were pretty humble people.

gamblor956 4y ago
To second that, the best programmers I know are quite upfront about how much they don't know. This can have the paradoxical effect of people relying on them less in situations where they should, because they think the 10x doesn't know anything, and instead they turn to the braggart 1/10x programmer who claims he knows everything. (Not meaning the OP on this; I just know a guy IRL who is exactly this.)
- leaflets2 4y ago
  Mistaking confidence for competence. (It seems to me, though, that OP is both competent and reasonably confident, a good combination.)
jslaby 4y ago
Like someone saying they're an alpha male... imo most devs, junior or not would love to tackle problems without the oversight of a lead. Maybe his code reviews are so heavy handed that devs would rather get his okay before rather than getting scorched after.
xpe 4y ago
I wonder if this is based on a statistical summary over your experience. What does your confusion matrix [1] look like? Also: (1) It is easy to say "from my experience" without sampling from it representatively. (2) It can be difficult, in general, to gather life experience that is balanced across all four elements of the confusion matrix. (This is a general statement that includes survivorship bias.) [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confusion_matrix https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confusion_matrix

gray_50 4y ago

I agree with this. Worked with a guy who sounds exactly like OP. The official perception was that he was a smart 10x engineer. But off the record people actually hated working with him. He was a massive control freak and the only reason we bought anything up with him was so he didn't have a cry about it later. Sometimes the "10x engineer" is just the one that's loudest and most persistent. Doesn't mean they're good. Just means no one else can be fucked dealing with them.

seattle_spring 4y ago

That is spot on to what I was thinking. I have encountered a few of these guys in my career and ohhhh man do they ever think they're the absolute best.