3 ms·
A lot of these points would be right if it wasn’t for the fact that software is so damn valuable. In investment banking for instance you are lucky to get 10 li
by benjaminwootton 4y ago
A lot of these points would be right if it wasn’t for the fact that software is so damn valuable.
In investment banking for instance you are lucky to get 10 lines of code into production per week, but those lines of code can soon add up to replace a trader making $1 million a year or supporting $X million in electronic trading commissions.
In Silicon Valley the salaries are breathtaking, but how many $billion and soon $trillion companies are being minted as a result of their efforts?
I think that’s the dynamic going on. Many developers are average and overpaid, but they are a scarce resource and look at what they can create in the right circumstances.
- Andrew_nenakhov 4y agoSome software brings in a lot of value, that's true, as evidenced by all the wealthy tech companies out there. But I think I wouldn't be too far off if I will estimate that only about 0.1% of developers create software that results in seven (or more) figure economic gains, 9,9% have moderate productivity that pays back their salary with some surplus and they other 90% of developers have actually negative productivity, and are only paid well thanks to the success of the first 0.1%
- randomdata 4y agoI expect similar numbers are found throughout the entire economy. Most businesses fail. The trouble is that we don't have a good sense for who the winners will be until after the costs are sunk, and since software has the one of the highest potential upsides we're willing to sink more into trying.