9 ms·

It is interesting, the two best developers I know are on the polar opposite of each other, from the outside. A: Started coding when he was 6 years old, was mak

It is interesting, the two best developers I know are on the polar opposite of each other, from the outside. A: Started coding when he was 6 years old, was making 3D games from scratch at 12, and sold his first software at 15. Never went to college, as he was right in time for the dotcom boom. The man just loves coding, and always works on his side projects in his spare time, mostly software he finds interesting. At work, he's the closest I've seen to a mythical 10x B: Hadn't written a line code before he switched majors in college. Went from having zero experience with programming, to being a straight A computer science student, finishing one year faster. Best student prize at university for masters, and then a Ph.D in record time. Writes flawless code, is a top tier architect, and just a machine. Doesn't write a line of code when he comes home (at least according to him), basically severs himself from work as soon as he leaves work.

laidoffamazon 1y ago
> Hadn't written a code before he switched majors in college. Went from having zero experience with programming, to being a straight A computer science student I’ve met these people before, they’re almost always undergrads from elite schools that could pick and succeed at anything they choose
- fnicfnac 1y ago
  I don't think elite school has much to do with talent just with how visible the things they are trusted with are.. From community college I've met some building things for companies too out of the mainstream to understand how unusual their IT worker was.
  - aDyslecticCrow 1y ago
    Pretty much all universes are first and fore-most strong people filters from my experience. The prestigious schools filter up-front based on merit, and filter a 2nd time based on the ability to keep up and remain diligent to pass the courses. Less famous schools only have the 2nd filter, and have more people drop in the process that could not keep up. The quality of education can be very similar, or even favor small schools in some subjects based on luck and school staff interests. The vast majority of learning at this level is made by the student anyway; there is only so much a good teacher or expensive teaching resources can do to help. I've talked with interviewers that seemed completely uninterested in what courses or major was taken, just the fact that someone got through a difficult major as a stamp of quality.
    - laidoffamazon 1y ago
      At my undergrad there were 16 4.0s in a CS graduating class of about 120. I didn’t get close - about a 3.92 because I’m a poor student too. Grade inflation isn’t just a thing at elite schools, even my undergrad with a 45-55% accept rate
      - aDyslecticCrow 1y ago
        I'm not sure accumulated average grade metrics are actually very useful. Just the difficulty variation between courses means you can game those metrics with careful choice anyway, Or studying in ways that benefit the tests more than the subject. Choosing difficult courses and passing is more valuable to the student. (well, a 4.0 on a paper is also valuable in a way, but more in a charade way) What concerns me is not grade inflation, its difficulty and deapth deflation. I had plenty of courses that bored me but that had plenty of fun depth and difficulty that could have been covered with a bit more effort of students and teacher. But we cannot measure courses difficulty and deapth, so we measure grade inflation instead. Which then lead us to false conclusions about how to solve it. (making the metrics more accurate at the cost of time and resources fir teaching the subjects) i think less emphasis on grade and more emphasis on covered subjects could mabie shift the incentive. Its difficult to actually implement through because humans love maximising metrics... so it will remain my fantasy.
  - laidoffamazon 1y ago
    If you look at the resumes of anyone at top schools and who gets into YC this isn’t true, they’re simply more accomplished before college than the rest of us are after (or in my case, ever).
    - fnicfnac 1y ago
      I look at resumes from time to time, just enough to know there aren't enough noble prizes. I also knew a number of elite school students and aside from usually having wealthy parents and motivation problems when given real world tasks with real world levels of possible reward, they aren't all that far away from the average. Take for example SBF.. possibly a genius would have gone straight to juvi either way if he was from a community college town and wasn't a nepo child of actual geniuses. More important than having any skills in the subject, he spoke economic shibboleth as a native speaker which his parents learned as a second tongue in a much harder process.
stronglikedan 1y ago
> Doesn't write a line of code when he comes home (at least according to him), basically severs himself from work as soon as he leaves work. I'm truly curios what percentage of programmers do write code outside of work. I'd bet the actually percentage is pretty low, especially those who've been at it for five years or more. I don't know that I ever did, except when I first started.
- Insanity 1y ago
  I did for maybe the first 10 years of my career. Then it kinda died down because family and other obligations increased so had less and less spare time. Also, the older I’m getting the more I’m prioritizing activities that benefit my body. Working out more, home cooked meals (so learning to actually cook well instead of throwing things together and hoping for the best). I miss the side projects sometimes. At least I still do AoC yearly.
- fragmede 1y ago
  Shit, how many programmers barely write code at work anymore because that's not what their job is? And I'm not talking about new AI things, I'm talking about design docs and meetings and OKRs.
  - ryandrake 1y ago
    I programmed at home as a hobby before I worked in the industry. Then, when I worked as a software developer, I pretty much stopped entirely because I did enough software at work. Finally, I moved over to the dark side to start doing product management and project management, and I've re-started hobby projects.
    - d_tr 1y ago
      If they try to take me away from my compiler and my code to do irrelevant stuff I'm just going to quit.
- schmookeeg 1y ago
  I'm surprised at this expectation. I work hard to cultivate hobbies outside of programming, but inevitably, I find a way to improve that other hobby with software. I'm just wired like that I think. I love systems. Code is my love language. :) I'm currently trying to digitize a hopelessly analog procedure to calibrate aircraft engine fuel injection systems. Rpi, transducers, and python to the rescue! :D
Aurornis 1y ago
> It is interesting, the two best developers I know Over time I've come to appreciate the difference between people who are described as the best programmers and people who are best at delivering results. Some times they're one in the same. It's wonderful when you work with someone who is both an excellent programmer and excellent and delivering results in a team. Many times I've worked with or even hired people who are brilliant developers and praised as being very smart, yet they didn't deliver results as well as the average developer on the team who diligently gets their work done. Looking back, some of the most stereotypically brilliant developers I've worked with have also been among the more difficult to work with. Not all of them, but quite a few. The two that come to mind have been bouncing from company to company for a long time. They'll always have job offers and be able to pass interviews, but actually working with them and getting good results is a different story. One of them even founded a startup with a co-founder, but unsurprisingly they broke up less than a year into it. On paper he should be the perfect fit to get launch a startup product, but working with him is a different matter. The brilliant devs I know who are great at delivering results usually find their way into good positions and good companies early in their career and then stay there for a long time.
- aleph_minus_one 1y ago
  > Many times I've worked with or even hired people who are brilliant developers and praised as being very smart, yet they didn't deliver results as well as the average developer on the team who diligently gets their work done. Very smart programmers often have a very different way of thinking about programming problems. If the project structure does not accommodate for this way of thinking, brillant programmers can barely use their "superpower". Also, great programmers often have a deep love for their craft, and thus be very opinionated about the best possible way of solving the programming problem at hand. So my bet is: - you don't have software problems that "need" superpowers (otherwise the average developer on the team would be of little use) - you don't have a project structure that enables exceptional programmers to actually use their superpowers - you already admitted that you are rather looking for people "who diligently get their work done" Exaggeratedly: you hired a Fields medalist to fix your clogged toilet, and you are now complaining that the average plumber is much better at fixing it.

laidoffamazon 1y ago

> Hadn't written a code before he switched majors in college. Went from having zero experience with programming, to being a straight A computer science student I’ve met these people before, they’re almost always undergrads from elite schools that could pick and succeed at anything they choose

fnicfnac 1y ago
I don't think elite school has much to do with talent just with how visible the things they are trusted with are.. From community college I've met some building things for companies too out of the mainstream to understand how unusual their IT worker was.
- aDyslecticCrow 1y ago
  Pretty much all universes are first and fore-most strong people filters from my experience. The prestigious schools filter up-front based on merit, and filter a 2nd time based on the ability to keep up and remain diligent to pass the courses. Less famous schools only have the 2nd filter, and have more people drop in the process that could not keep up. The quality of education can be very similar, or even favor small schools in some subjects based on luck and school staff interests. The vast majority of learning at this level is made by the student anyway; there is only so much a good teacher or expensive teaching resources can do to help. I've talked with interviewers that seemed completely uninterested in what courses or major was taken, just the fact that someone got through a difficult major as a stamp of quality.
  - laidoffamazon 1y ago
    At my undergrad there were 16 4.0s in a CS graduating class of about 120. I didn’t get close - about a 3.92 because I’m a poor student too. Grade inflation isn’t just a thing at elite schools, even my undergrad with a 45-55% accept rate
    - aDyslecticCrow 1y ago
      I'm not sure accumulated average grade metrics are actually very useful. Just the difficulty variation between courses means you can game those metrics with careful choice anyway, Or studying in ways that benefit the tests more than the subject. Choosing difficult courses and passing is more valuable to the student. (well, a 4.0 on a paper is also valuable in a way, but more in a charade way) What concerns me is not grade inflation, its difficulty and deapth deflation. I had plenty of courses that bored me but that had plenty of fun depth and difficulty that could have been covered with a bit more effort of students and teacher. But we cannot measure courses difficulty and deapth, so we measure grade inflation instead. Which then lead us to false conclusions about how to solve it. (making the metrics more accurate at the cost of time and resources fir teaching the subjects) i think less emphasis on grade and more emphasis on covered subjects could mabie shift the incentive. Its difficult to actually implement through because humans love maximising metrics... so it will remain my fantasy.
- laidoffamazon 1y ago
  If you look at the resumes of anyone at top schools and who gets into YC this isn’t true, they’re simply more accomplished before college than the rest of us are after (or in my case, ever).
  - fnicfnac 1y ago
    I look at resumes from time to time, just enough to know there aren't enough noble prizes. I also knew a number of elite school students and aside from usually having wealthy parents and motivation problems when given real world tasks with real world levels of possible reward, they aren't all that far away from the average. Take for example SBF.. possibly a genius would have gone straight to juvi either way if he was from a community college town and wasn't a nepo child of actual geniuses. More important than having any skills in the subject, he spoke economic shibboleth as a native speaker which his parents learned as a second tongue in a much harder process.

stronglikedan 1y ago

> Doesn't write a line of code when he comes home (at least according to him), basically severs himself from work as soon as he leaves work. I'm truly curios what percentage of programmers do write code outside of work. I'd bet the actually percentage is pretty low, especially those who've been at it for five years or more. I don't know that I ever did, except when I first started.

Insanity 1y ago
I did for maybe the first 10 years of my career. Then it kinda died down because family and other obligations increased so had less and less spare time. Also, the older I’m getting the more I’m prioritizing activities that benefit my body. Working out more, home cooked meals (so learning to actually cook well instead of throwing things together and hoping for the best). I miss the side projects sometimes. At least I still do AoC yearly.
fragmede 1y ago
Shit, how many programmers barely write code at work anymore because that's not what their job is? And I'm not talking about new AI things, I'm talking about design docs and meetings and OKRs.
- ryandrake 1y ago
  I programmed at home as a hobby before I worked in the industry. Then, when I worked as a software developer, I pretty much stopped entirely because I did enough software at work. Finally, I moved over to the dark side to start doing product management and project management, and I've re-started hobby projects.
  - d_tr 1y ago
    If they try to take me away from my compiler and my code to do irrelevant stuff I'm just going to quit.
schmookeeg 1y ago
I'm surprised at this expectation. I work hard to cultivate hobbies outside of programming, but inevitably, I find a way to improve that other hobby with software. I'm just wired like that I think. I love systems. Code is my love language. :) I'm currently trying to digitize a hopelessly analog procedure to calibrate aircraft engine fuel injection systems. Rpi, transducers, and python to the rescue! :D

Aurornis 1y ago

> It is interesting, the two best developers I know Over time I've come to appreciate the difference between people who are described as the best programmers and people who are best at delivering results. Some times they're one in the same. It's wonderful when you work with someone who is both an excellent programmer and excellent and delivering results in a team. Many times I've worked with or even hired people who are brilliant developers and praised as being very smart, yet they didn't deliver results as well as the average developer on the team who diligently gets their work done. Looking back, some of the most stereotypically brilliant developers I've worked with have also been among the more difficult to work with. Not all of them, but quite a few. The two that come to mind have been bouncing from company to company for a long time. They'll always have job offers and be able to pass interviews, but actually working with them and getting good results is a different story. One of them even founded a startup with a co-founder, but unsurprisingly they broke up less than a year into it. On paper he should be the perfect fit to get launch a startup product, but working with him is a different matter. The brilliant devs I know who are great at delivering results usually find their way into good positions and good companies early in their career and then stay there for a long time.

aleph_minus_one 1y ago
> Many times I've worked with or even hired people who are brilliant developers and praised as being very smart, yet they didn't deliver results as well as the average developer on the team who diligently gets their work done. Very smart programmers often have a very different way of thinking about programming problems. If the project structure does not accommodate for this way of thinking, brillant programmers can barely use their "superpower". Also, great programmers often have a deep love for their craft, and thus be very opinionated about the best possible way of solving the programming problem at hand. So my bet is: - you don't have software problems that "need" superpowers (otherwise the average developer on the team would be of little use) - you don't have a project structure that enables exceptional programmers to actually use their superpowers - you already admitted that you are rather looking for people "who diligently get their work done" Exaggeratedly: you hired a Fields medalist to fix your clogged toilet, and you are now complaining that the average plumber is much better at fixing it.