5 ms·
> 200 average developers This is the problem, and as you implicate, the exact sort of thing we need to stop doing.
by Arelius 14y ago
> 200 average developers
This is the problem, and as you implicate, the exact sort of thing we need to stop doing.
- taligent 14y agoSure. So long as you have a full proof way of identifying the best developers. Hint: the best developers aren't the ones who can recite the API off hand.
- rabidsnail 14y agoYou have to be willing to fire them if it turns out they're they suck.
- tatsuke95 14y agoAverage != suck. Anyone who thinks they are going to do nothing but hire above-average programmers at any scale is downright naive. Design your system around an "average" employee, and you'll be far happier.
- rabidsnail 14y agoYou can do a hell of a lot with a 10-15 person team. Unless you're consulting your company can grow much faster than your team.
- mixitup12 14y agoFool. Fool proof. Not full.
- Daniel_Newby 14y agoThanks, you really honed in on that mistake. <runs away>
- FixThisPOSSite 14y ago"Full proof"?
- radicalbyte 14y ago> Sure. So long as you have a full proof way of identifying the best developers. It's easier to grow them.
- apl 14y ago> This is the problem, and as you implicate, > the exact sort of thing we need to stop doing. You do see the absurdity here, right? Banking on substantially above-average developers doesn't work at scale, by definition.