4 ms·

Software people tend to overestimate their knowledge of other disciplines, writing it off as "easy" or work beneath them. Being overpaid compared to your peers

Software people tend to overestimate their knowledge of other disciplines, writing it off as "easy" or work beneath them. Being overpaid compared to your peers certainly doesn't help dispel this feeling. Some people have built entire careers around designing wire looms.

EA-3167 7mo ago
There's a reason that John Salvatier's 'Reality Has A Surprising Amount of Detail' blog entry is so evergreen on this forum.
acuozzo 7mo ago
> Software people tend to overestimate their knowledge of other disciplines, writing it off as "easy" or work beneath them You should see what happens when someone involved in the sciences, e.g. Chemistry, gets their hands on Claude Code.
- juleiie 7mo ago
  What happens?
  - incrediblylarge 7mo ago
    A professional scientist I know (tenured, professor) recruited me to set up a backtesting framework for a predictive finance model. When the results were not as they expected (this person does not work in finance and never has), they asked to see the code, then told me that claude had found a problem with the way some of the calculations were done (there was actually no problem), supplied the claude comments, and told me to change the code to match what they thought was correct. I did it anyway. Had they had more expertise in the domain (finance), they likely would have been able to leverage claude as a tool rather than inadvertently pursuing a very stupid mistake. Domain experts tend to doubt their ability to excel in other domains which is amplified by LLMs.
    - zer00eyz 7mo ago
      I work with a bunch of PHD's and have been since before ai coding. Their code is aways terrible, and they constantly think it's good. The exercise is always the same: explain the math to me, like I'm 5, then we profile it and see what is faster. Oddly Claude Code, integrated into their IDE's has made this situation happen much less. I never want to work in a place again where the fun way to start the Monday meeting is a "math problem". PS: Don't even get me started on their SQL.
      - ultrahax 7mo ago
        My first job out of university was at IBM wrangling a prototype some research PHDs had written into a shipping product, and.. yeah, this tracks.
    - Reason077 7mo ago
      This sounds rather similar to the form of scientific fraud where you first create a conclusion, then invent/manipulate the data until it supports your conclusion.
  - acuozzo 7mo ago
    They suddenly act as if Claude has awarded them with a second PhD in CS. Now they know everything and everything you tell them gets filtered through Claude. It's like "software dude thinks he can do hardware", but on steroids. They don't know what they don't know and they think they have a panacea in their hands. Don't you know? Software is beneath them and the fiddly bits are just standing in the way of them getting their BigImportantWork™ done.
desmondwillow 7mo ago
Consider whether this is an uncharitable comment --- someone with little expertise in a discipline has made a rookie mistake and didn't realize that the wires weren't produced individually. Professionals overestimating their knowledge is a very common thing!
- killjoywashere 7mo ago
  Fair, but software engineers are especially known for this. There was an XKCD about it https://xkcd.com/1831/ https://xkcd.com/1831/
kvuj 7mo ago
What a rancid comment. The first thing you can think of when seeing someone earnestly sharing their learning process, is to insult them of being vain.
- rpmisms 7mo ago
  He's right about the rest. We software people can definitely be annoying.
  - OccamsMirror 7mo ago
    All people are annoying. It's still mean spirited in this instance. The author is likely reading all of these comments.
- DrewADesign 7mo ago
  Try working on a software project as a non-developer and see if you still respond so negatively to their sentiment. I can’t tell you how many times developers tried to arrogantly and dismissively explain design principles to me, as an experienced, degree-holding designer, because they skimmed a whole Tufte book at some point. I was a developer for a decade before I went to school for design, so I’ve seen it from the other side. It’s not all bad: that overconfidence can lead people to tackle problems they’d abandon if they really understood the domain’s complexities. But often it presents like developers acting like their genius developer brain allows them to solve difficult problems in completely different fields with a few glib analogies and a few brief thought experiments.
gedy 7mo ago
I don't know, I've had more non-technical people and trades try and mansplain bullshit they don't understand than tech people have.
zer00eyz 7mo ago
People tend to overestimate their knowledge of other disciplines. I have worked with a LOT of PHD's in recent years. Their code leaves much to be desired.
SecretDreams 7mo ago
It's called misplaced confidence and it isn't exclusive to software engineers. Doctors, engineers, presidents... The list goes on.

EA-3167 7mo ago

There's a reason that John Salvatier's 'Reality Has A Surprising Amount of Detail' blog entry is so evergreen on this forum.

acuozzo 7mo ago

> Software people tend to overestimate their knowledge of other disciplines, writing it off as "easy" or work beneath them You should see what happens when someone involved in the sciences, e.g. Chemistry, gets their hands on Claude Code.

juleiie 7mo ago
What happens?
- incrediblylarge 7mo ago
  A professional scientist I know (tenured, professor) recruited me to set up a backtesting framework for a predictive finance model. When the results were not as they expected (this person does not work in finance and never has), they asked to see the code, then told me that claude had found a problem with the way some of the calculations were done (there was actually no problem), supplied the claude comments, and told me to change the code to match what they thought was correct. I did it anyway. Had they had more expertise in the domain (finance), they likely would have been able to leverage claude as a tool rather than inadvertently pursuing a very stupid mistake. Domain experts tend to doubt their ability to excel in other domains which is amplified by LLMs.
  - zer00eyz 7mo ago
    I work with a bunch of PHD's and have been since before ai coding. Their code is aways terrible, and they constantly think it's good. The exercise is always the same: explain the math to me, like I'm 5, then we profile it and see what is faster. Oddly Claude Code, integrated into their IDE's has made this situation happen much less. I never want to work in a place again where the fun way to start the Monday meeting is a "math problem". PS: Don't even get me started on their SQL.
    - ultrahax 7mo ago
      My first job out of university was at IBM wrangling a prototype some research PHDs had written into a shipping product, and.. yeah, this tracks.
  - Reason077 7mo ago
    This sounds rather similar to the form of scientific fraud where you first create a conclusion, then invent/manipulate the data until it supports your conclusion.
- acuozzo 7mo ago
  They suddenly act as if Claude has awarded them with a second PhD in CS. Now they know everything and everything you tell them gets filtered through Claude. It's like "software dude thinks he can do hardware", but on steroids. They don't know what they don't know and they think they have a panacea in their hands. Don't you know? Software is beneath them and the fiddly bits are just standing in the way of them getting their BigImportantWork™ done.

desmondwillow 7mo ago

Consider whether this is an uncharitable comment --- someone with little expertise in a discipline has made a rookie mistake and didn't realize that the wires weren't produced individually. Professionals overestimating their knowledge is a very common thing!

killjoywashere 7mo ago
Fair, but software engineers are especially known for this. There was an XKCD about it https://xkcd.com/1831/ https://xkcd.com/1831/

kvuj 7mo ago

What a rancid comment. The first thing you can think of when seeing someone earnestly sharing their learning process, is to insult them of being vain.

rpmisms 7mo ago
He's right about the rest. We software people can definitely be annoying.
- OccamsMirror 7mo ago
  All people are annoying. It's still mean spirited in this instance. The author is likely reading all of these comments.
DrewADesign 7mo ago
Try working on a software project as a non-developer and see if you still respond so negatively to their sentiment. I can’t tell you how many times developers tried to arrogantly and dismissively explain design principles to me, as an experienced, degree-holding designer, because they skimmed a whole Tufte book at some point. I was a developer for a decade before I went to school for design, so I’ve seen it from the other side. It’s not all bad: that overconfidence can lead people to tackle problems they’d abandon if they really understood the domain’s complexities. But often it presents like developers acting like their genius developer brain allows them to solve difficult problems in completely different fields with a few glib analogies and a few brief thought experiments.

gedy 7mo ago

I don't know, I've had more non-technical people and trades try and mansplain bullshit they don't understand than tech people have.

zer00eyz 7mo ago

People tend to overestimate their knowledge of other disciplines. I have worked with a LOT of PHD's in recent years. Their code leaves much to be desired.

SecretDreams 7mo ago

It's called misplaced confidence and it isn't exclusive to software engineers. Doctors, engineers, presidents... The list goes on.