3 ms·

> It lost me at the assertion of the 100x productivity differences between programmers. Is there not a trivial counter-example: the programmer from an awful bo

by Veuxdo 4y ago

> It lost me at the assertion of the 100x productivity differences between programmers. Is there not a trivial counter-example: the programmer from an awful boot camp on his first day on the job vs., say, John Carmack.

marcus_holmes 4y ago
> and has thus observed first-hand the well-known variance of a factor of one hundred in productivity between the most able programmers and the merely competent. from the text - it excludes the trivial counter-examples. No-one expects complete newbies to be productive, or even capable of performing the task set. The comparison is always between normal, professional programmers and those "10x" alpha-male (they're always male) exceptional individuals who break all the rules (and therefore don't have to obey them). I've worked with a few self-described "10x" programmers, and (like the few self-described "alpha male" guys I've worked with) they're always toxic assholes who don't understand how teams work. In every case the team would have worked better, faster, without them. But that's anecdata.
- Veuxdo 4y ago
  Are there any 10x professions? There are certainly 10x products and companies (e.g. Oreo vs. Hydrox, Google vs. Lycos). They got that why by making better choices. Many more than "10" x better choices. Could this apply to developers also?
- jmillikin 4y ago
  > The comparison is always between normal, professional programmers > and those "10x" alpha-male The commonly-cited 10x difference is between the best and worst engineers, not best and average.
  - Veuxdo 4y ago
    The worst engineers provide negative value, the metaphorical guys rowing the wrong way. Certainly some managers have experienced this.
    - jmillikin 4y ago
      The study that produced the "10x engineer" finding was not about an abstract sort of business value, it was about programming. The claim that 10x engineers exist is: Given a group of programmers who are capable of planning and executing some project, the most effective member will be approximately 10x "better" (at speed / correctness) than the least effective member. I've been on both ends of that 10x, but have never experienced a situation where all the programmers were approximately the same. There's always someone who is clearly more capable, and someone who is not.
      - Nomentatus 4y ago
        Hmmm. I'm gonna agree the slow way. I take it you are not referring to lines written/hour but, lines of code that survive; or time to working code that meets set goals, and maybe ten percent of the vicious, business-killing bugs. But then again, maybe the mediocre guys spend a whole lot of time looking for code that they can cut, paste and modify. That certainly used to happen with hardware circuits. Given that most large projects don't make it to the finish line, someone who has consistently pushed projects over the finish line looks like an outlier to me. If your 10x gal (or guy) can choose a far better algorithm, that's not just 10x; that's maybe clear success vs total failure. (So you'll be dividing by zero if you want a ratio, there.) To switch to the military context, it's funny how all the people I know who don't think there are any 10x Generals also firmly believe there are minus 10x Generals. Maybe even lots of them. And can somehow maintain both those beliefs at the same time. Both history and personal experience (not as a general) tells me that true competence is difficult to achieve and that most people are far too lazy to get there, or have personalities that block them. Everybody thinks the have an above-average sense of humor and are amongst the best drivers, but they know that they aren't 10x for humor and driving. Maybe, to maintain their illusion, they have to say there are no 10x ers, cause then they don't look above average anymore.
  - marcus_holmes 4y ago
    that's not the comparison in this text, as I cited earlier - the text claims a 100x difference between the best and the average.
    - jmillikin 4y ago
      Your post says: > there are differences in productivity, as you'd expect, but even > the more-commonly-cited "10x" is bullshit. and then you continue with the quoted statement that the comparison is between "normal, professional programmers" and someone 10x better than that. However, that is not the standard meaning of "10x programmer". That term refers to someone 10x better than the worst programmer.
woooooo 4y ago
Even then, there's about 200 workdays in the year. There are probably scenarios where I'd rather have 2 days of Carmack than a year of a newbie, but they are rare and specialized.

by Veuxdo 4y ago

marcus_holmes 4y ago

> and has thus observed first-hand the well-known variance of a factor of one hundred in productivity between the most able programmers and the merely competent. from the text - it excludes the trivial counter-examples. No-one expects complete newbies to be productive, or even capable of performing the task set. The comparison is always between normal, professional programmers and those "10x" alpha-male (they're always male) exceptional individuals who break all the rules (and therefore don't have to obey them). I've worked with a few self-described "10x" programmers, and (like the few self-described "alpha male" guys I've worked with) they're always toxic assholes who don't understand how teams work. In every case the team would have worked better, faster, without them. But that's anecdata.

Veuxdo 4y ago
Are there any 10x professions? There are certainly 10x products and companies (e.g. Oreo vs. Hydrox, Google vs. Lycos). They got that why by making better choices. Many more than "10" x better choices. Could this apply to developers also?
jmillikin 4y ago
> The comparison is always between normal, professional programmers > and those "10x" alpha-male The commonly-cited 10x difference is between the best and worst engineers, not best and average.
- Veuxdo 4y ago
  The worst engineers provide negative value, the metaphorical guys rowing the wrong way. Certainly some managers have experienced this.
  - jmillikin 4y ago
    The study that produced the "10x engineer" finding was not about an abstract sort of business value, it was about programming. The claim that 10x engineers exist is: Given a group of programmers who are capable of planning and executing some project, the most effective member will be approximately 10x "better" (at speed / correctness) than the least effective member. I've been on both ends of that 10x, but have never experienced a situation where all the programmers were approximately the same. There's always someone who is clearly more capable, and someone who is not.
    - Nomentatus 4y ago
      Hmmm. I'm gonna agree the slow way. I take it you are not referring to lines written/hour but, lines of code that survive; or time to working code that meets set goals, and maybe ten percent of the vicious, business-killing bugs. But then again, maybe the mediocre guys spend a whole lot of time looking for code that they can cut, paste and modify. That certainly used to happen with hardware circuits. Given that most large projects don't make it to the finish line, someone who has consistently pushed projects over the finish line looks like an outlier to me. If your 10x gal (or guy) can choose a far better algorithm, that's not just 10x; that's maybe clear success vs total failure. (So you'll be dividing by zero if you want a ratio, there.) To switch to the military context, it's funny how all the people I know who don't think there are any 10x Generals also firmly believe there are minus 10x Generals. Maybe even lots of them. And can somehow maintain both those beliefs at the same time. Both history and personal experience (not as a general) tells me that true competence is difficult to achieve and that most people are far too lazy to get there, or have personalities that block them. Everybody thinks the have an above-average sense of humor and are amongst the best drivers, but they know that they aren't 10x for humor and driving. Maybe, to maintain their illusion, they have to say there are no 10x ers, cause then they don't look above average anymore.
- marcus_holmes 4y ago
  that's not the comparison in this text, as I cited earlier - the text claims a 100x difference between the best and the average.
  - jmillikin 4y ago
    Your post says: > there are differences in productivity, as you'd expect, but even > the more-commonly-cited "10x" is bullshit. and then you continue with the quoted statement that the comparison is between "normal, professional programmers" and someone 10x better than that. However, that is not the standard meaning of "10x programmer". That term refers to someone 10x better than the worst programmer.

woooooo 4y ago

Even then, there's about 200 workdays in the year. There are probably scenarios where I'd rather have 2 days of Carmack than a year of a newbie, but they are rare and specialized.