4 ms·

> If you call yourself a programmer, someone is already working on a way to get you fired. If you work at a place like that, I feel sorry for you. Even the ow

> If you call yourself a programmer, someone is already working on a way to get you fired. If you work at a place like that, I feel sorry for you. Even the owner of my company lists himself on Twitter and his blog as just Programmer at RAD Game Tools. Besides being the sounding board for us when we have problems and ideas, he still writes more code than most of us can regularly muster.

bryanh 15y ago
Perhaps taken in context one might have read it as "if you describe your sole value as the ability to write code, someone is already working on a way to get you fired".
- psykotic 15y ago
  I understand the context. Patrick's formulation is so commonplace as to be cliche. Code is our medium of expression. There's nothing inaccurate or ignominious about describing ourselves as programmers. To say that the code exists to solve problems is to flirt with tautology.
  - cwp 15y ago
    You still miss the point, though. Patrick isn't saying that calling yourself a programmer is inaccurate or ignominious. He's saying that it's not going to have a desirable effect on the listener. He's saying you should talk about the value you create, rather than the effort you expend.
    - beezee 15y ago
      This is marketing 101- the issue is why would you work somewhere that you have to continuously market yourself just to keep your job? That's what the interview is for. Personally in my experience working with startups, everyone at the company knows why I'm there, what I do, and there's no question about the value I bring. What I call myself just doesn't matter. I would wish this type of experience for everyone.
      - cdavid 15y ago
        But Patrick specifically mentions about the majority of "programmers", those who work for companies big enough such as people above them will barely know your name. Also, be careful about the notion that there is no question about the value you bring to your company. That may be true while the company is doing well, but if the need arises to reduce costs, the question will come up.
- randomdata 15y ago
  A programmer, to me, is someone who is familiar with the entire process of software development. From gathering requirements, to designing interfaces, to writing code, to delivering and supporting the final product. I believe the term normally used to refer to someone who can only write code is code monkey.
  - rickmb 15y ago
    You should get out in the real world more and especially talk to people who are not in software development. What you call a code monkey is what the rest of the world considers a programmer.
    - randomdata 15y ago
      Code monkey is not my term. I find it to be a little derogatory, personally. Still, despite that, it is the term commonly used for the job. Most people in the real world have no idea what it takes to develop software. They believe if someone is a programmer, they can develop the entire thing from top to bottom and everything in between. It is really only in the tech circles where people see why the job is separated out into different roles for different people. Some there equate programmer with "code monkey," but their opinion is not the norm. And one I do not agree with.
    - Swannie 15y ago
      Yep. The real world says a programmer only writes code, a developer does all the rest of the work around programming as well.
wallflower 15y ago
Coding ability (the 99% not the 1% of elite coders) is a commodity. "The question used to be: Does it run? That was enough, because software that worked was scarce... So if it’s not about avoiding fatal bugs, what’s the business of software? At its heart, you need to imagine (and then execute) a business that just happens to involve a piece of software, because it’s become clear that software alone isn’t the point. There isn’t a supply issue--it’s about demand. The business of software is now marketing (which includes design)." http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2010/10/the-business-of-software.html http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2010/10/the-business...
wladimir 15y ago
Right... Whatever you call yourself, someone is already working on a way to get you fired. The less expenses a corporation has on personnel the better. I don't think fancy job titles are going to save anyone from automation. I hate the arrogant tone of the author. Also, people have been saying this about programmers longer than 10 years. "Don't go into programming, you will soon be redundant". But the super general purpose code generating AI is still developed yet... Software is everywhere and we need more programmers than ever. I think a lot of other jobs will still be automated away before it's our turn. And in that case, if computers can make those creative mind-jumps, even doctors are going to feel this, and lawyers. The end of the productive lifetime of humans will be very, very close and we'll have other things to think about such as rethinking the economic paradigm. And please let it be the arrogant MBA types for a change to be jobless. "Masters of the universe". Puke.
cbs 15y ago
>If you work at a place like that, I feel sorry for you. I came to the comments to express the same sort of opinion. I work at a place that understands and values programmers. I can't imagine working in any other kind of environment unless I was between real jobs and really strapped for cash. If you're at a place run by a bunch of clueless MBAs that don't understand the value of their in-house engineers you just don't have a good (or reliable) job.
- maaku 15y ago
  Are those MBA's clueless? Programmers are costs, and expensive ones at that. We start off underwater on the value proposition. Saying "I'm a programmer" is saying "I'm a large, fixed cost." The question for the businessman is always: what value do you add, and does it exceed your costs? Yes, there's value for an in-house engineering team, but with widely varying skill distributions and unevenly matched compensation. Managers know this, and Patrick's point is that "I'm a programmer" is starting off on the wrong foot as it just re-affirms that you are a large, fixed cost, saying nothing about your specific contributions.
  - anthonyb 15y ago
    The value of programmers tends not be linear with cost though. Paying an extra 25-50% for decent ones gets you at least a 2x improvement, possibly more if they can rewrite large chunks of your corporate code to improve it.
    - maaku 15y ago
      That's precisely my point. The question in the businessman's head is "are you one of the decent ones? are we getting our money's worth?"
      - anthonyb 15y ago
        Yes, and it should be, but the answer, unfortunately, is that they typically have no idea who is a good programmer and who isn't, so they only end up hiring cheap programmers. In other words - yes, they are clueless.

bryanh 15y ago

Perhaps taken in context one might have read it as "if you describe your sole value as the ability to write code, someone is already working on a way to get you fired".

psykotic 15y ago
I understand the context. Patrick's formulation is so commonplace as to be cliche. Code is our medium of expression. There's nothing inaccurate or ignominious about describing ourselves as programmers. To say that the code exists to solve problems is to flirt with tautology.
- cwp 15y ago
  You still miss the point, though. Patrick isn't saying that calling yourself a programmer is inaccurate or ignominious. He's saying that it's not going to have a desirable effect on the listener. He's saying you should talk about the value you create, rather than the effort you expend.
  - beezee 15y ago
    This is marketing 101- the issue is why would you work somewhere that you have to continuously market yourself just to keep your job? That's what the interview is for. Personally in my experience working with startups, everyone at the company knows why I'm there, what I do, and there's no question about the value I bring. What I call myself just doesn't matter. I would wish this type of experience for everyone.
    - cdavid 15y ago
      But Patrick specifically mentions about the majority of "programmers", those who work for companies big enough such as people above them will barely know your name. Also, be careful about the notion that there is no question about the value you bring to your company. That may be true while the company is doing well, but if the need arises to reduce costs, the question will come up.
randomdata 15y ago
A programmer, to me, is someone who is familiar with the entire process of software development. From gathering requirements, to designing interfaces, to writing code, to delivering and supporting the final product. I believe the term normally used to refer to someone who can only write code is code monkey.
- rickmb 15y ago
  You should get out in the real world more and especially talk to people who are not in software development. What you call a code monkey is what the rest of the world considers a programmer.
  - randomdata 15y ago
    Code monkey is not my term. I find it to be a little derogatory, personally. Still, despite that, it is the term commonly used for the job. Most people in the real world have no idea what it takes to develop software. They believe if someone is a programmer, they can develop the entire thing from top to bottom and everything in between. It is really only in the tech circles where people see why the job is separated out into different roles for different people. Some there equate programmer with "code monkey," but their opinion is not the norm. And one I do not agree with.
  - Swannie 15y ago
    Yep. The real world says a programmer only writes code, a developer does all the rest of the work around programming as well.

wallflower 15y ago

Coding ability (the 99% not the 1% of elite coders) is a commodity. "The question used to be: Does it run? That was enough, because software that worked was scarce... So if it’s not about avoiding fatal bugs, what’s the business of software? At its heart, you need to imagine (and then execute) a business that just happens to involve a piece of software, because it’s become clear that software alone isn’t the point. There isn’t a supply issue--it’s about demand. The business of software is now marketing (which includes design)." http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2010/10/the-business-of-software.html http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2010/10/the-business...

wladimir 15y ago

Right... Whatever you call yourself, someone is already working on a way to get you fired. The less expenses a corporation has on personnel the better. I don't think fancy job titles are going to save anyone from automation. I hate the arrogant tone of the author. Also, people have been saying this about programmers longer than 10 years. "Don't go into programming, you will soon be redundant". But the super general purpose code generating AI is still developed yet... Software is everywhere and we need more programmers than ever. I think a lot of other jobs will still be automated away before it's our turn. And in that case, if computers can make those creative mind-jumps, even doctors are going to feel this, and lawyers. The end of the productive lifetime of humans will be very, very close and we'll have other things to think about such as rethinking the economic paradigm. And please let it be the arrogant MBA types for a change to be jobless. "Masters of the universe". Puke.

cbs 15y ago

>If you work at a place like that, I feel sorry for you. I came to the comments to express the same sort of opinion. I work at a place that understands and values programmers. I can't imagine working in any other kind of environment unless I was between real jobs and really strapped for cash. If you're at a place run by a bunch of clueless MBAs that don't understand the value of their in-house engineers you just don't have a good (or reliable) job.

maaku 15y ago
Are those MBA's clueless? Programmers are costs, and expensive ones at that. We start off underwater on the value proposition. Saying "I'm a programmer" is saying "I'm a large, fixed cost." The question for the businessman is always: what value do you add, and does it exceed your costs? Yes, there's value for an in-house engineering team, but with widely varying skill distributions and unevenly matched compensation. Managers know this, and Patrick's point is that "I'm a programmer" is starting off on the wrong foot as it just re-affirms that you are a large, fixed cost, saying nothing about your specific contributions.
- anthonyb 15y ago
  The value of programmers tends not be linear with cost though. Paying an extra 25-50% for decent ones gets you at least a 2x improvement, possibly more if they can rewrite large chunks of your corporate code to improve it.
  - maaku 15y ago
    That's precisely my point. The question in the businessman's head is "are you one of the decent ones? are we getting our money's worth?"
    - anthonyb 15y ago
      Yes, and it should be, but the answer, unfortunately, is that they typically have no idea who is a good programmer and who isn't, so they only end up hiring cheap programmers. In other words - yes, they are clueless.