3 ms·

Okay, but it still doesn't work. The world's worst engineer who somehow managed to successfully contribute one line of code to something like GPT is way more pr

Okay, but it still doesn't work. The world's worst engineer who somehow managed to successfully contribute one line of code to something like GPT is way more productive than a great engineer who designed from top to bottom the best laid software ever conceived but was thrown away before seeing the light of day because the business changed direction. Of course, that doesn't actually matter as the original study found a 10x difference in measuring performance, not productivity. There is nothing out there to suggest that some developers are 10x more productive outside of those who mixed up their p words. We're not actually talking about productivity; that was just a mistake. If one were to study productivity, I expect they would find that some engineers are many orders of magnitude more productive than the least productive engineers.

loeg 3y ago
> The world's worst engineer who somehow managed to successfully contribute one line of code to something like GPT is way more productive than a great engineer who designed from top to bottom the best laid software ever conceived but was thrown away before seeing the light of day because the business changed direction. I reject that assertion. > performance, not productivity You keep saying this like it's a slam dunk refutation, but performance and productivity are highly related.
- randomdata 3y ago
  > I reject that assertion. Because you don't believe the worst developer contributed anything to GPT? Sure, in reality that's no doubt true, but it was only ever meant to be illustrative. > but performance and productivity are highly related. Not in any meaningful way. The study found that the fastest developer can perform a set of defined tasks in a 10th of the time of the slowest developer. That is what the 10x developer refers to. But being fast doesn't mean being productive. Come to my backyard and we will each dig a hole of equal size. Let's assume that you can dig the hole in a 10th of the time I can – that you are the 10x hole digger. But, no matter how fast you are, neither of us will be productive.

loeg 3y ago

> The world's worst engineer who somehow managed to successfully contribute one line of code to something like GPT is way more productive than a great engineer who designed from top to bottom the best laid software ever conceived but was thrown away before seeing the light of day because the business changed direction. I reject that assertion. > performance, not productivity You keep saying this like it's a slam dunk refutation, but performance and productivity are highly related.

randomdata 3y ago
> I reject that assertion. Because you don't believe the worst developer contributed anything to GPT? Sure, in reality that's no doubt true, but it was only ever meant to be illustrative. > but performance and productivity are highly related. Not in any meaningful way. The study found that the fastest developer can perform a set of defined tasks in a 10th of the time of the slowest developer. That is what the 10x developer refers to. But being fast doesn't mean being productive. Come to my backyard and we will each dig a hole of equal size. Let's assume that you can dig the hole in a 10th of the time I can – that you are the 10x hole digger. But, no matter how fast you are, neither of us will be productive.