3 ms·
But probably the least subjective, and yeah, my position is that 10x is unrealistic.
by subroutine 4y ago
But probably the least subjective, and yeah, my position is that 10x is unrealistic.
- ComputerGuru 4y agoIt may be the least subjective but it’s also the least technically/physically probable even if someone were a 10x developer. The gambit is that a mediocre programmer would take 10x as long to write the same code as the hypothetical 10x dev. But that’s not what a mediocre or even average dev does: they solve the problem in an entirely different (and, for purposes of this argument, less optimal) manner in some spam of time that may or may not be longer than a qualified hacker or a theoretical 10x dev. Almost all CS problems have multiple solutions, so you’re not likely to find one where there is only one solution and it takes one guy x and the other guy 10x as long.
- subroutine 4y agoFair. I get your point. My only contention is of the magnitude - imo someone 10 times better than the average developer is a unicorn. But the term gets thrown around any time someone is 'just' really good; they wrote fairly optimal code, quickly. However, to your point, there may be an argument to be made that people who have made a huge impact on the CS landscape are 10x-ers (regardless of efficiency). Is Linus a 10x-er?