3 ms·

To further your point... So, Usain Bolt has run the 100m in 9.58 seconds. A decent time for a high school runner, according to http://www.reddit.com/comments/

To further your point... So, Usain Bolt has run the 100m in 9.58 seconds. A decent time for a high school runner, according to http://www.reddit.com/comments/xu93j/hey_fittit_what_is_a_good_100m_time/ http://www.reddit.com/comments/xu93j/hey_fittit_what_is_a_go... (admittedly an arbitrary , is around 12 seconds. So, the difference between an amateur in high school and the best in the world is about 25%.

ericsink 12y ago
Er, yeah, time is linear, but I don't think the distribution of runners is. I bet there's a bell curve there, and Usain Bolt is WAY, WAY off on the right part of the curve.
- cheepin 12y ago
  I bet a similar curve exists for runner's paychecks with similar placement for Usain Bolt.
alkonaut 12y ago
In a team sports the bell curve difference is magnified through competition. A team with members all 10% "better" than the opposition (by some measure) could win 99% of the games. So once you count wins as the only deliverable, they are 100x better, not 10% better! You could argue that programming is also competitive; a business that is 10% more efficient will routinely win contracts against the opposition, better their reputation etc. Elite developers exist as it would be ridiculous to think that talent can't be found in this field. Like learning a spoken language, some become fluent in months while others never do. And I think talent is probably at least as relevant than it is in sports. The question is merely what leverage a talented programmer can get from say a 10% or 100% advantage over the average skill or productivity? Completing tasks as an individual is one thing, being in a team is something else, and competing as a team will further increase the leverage of skill. The 10x-average developer likely does not exist. Developers that produce 2-3x the average developer are probably common. What we forget is that those don't necessarily produce business value at that rate (which they solve problems), but like I explained above: being the winning team in competition could give increased returns by thousands of percent.

ericsink 12y ago

Er, yeah, time is linear, but I don't think the distribution of runners is. I bet there's a bell curve there, and Usain Bolt is WAY, WAY off on the right part of the curve.

cheepin 12y ago
I bet a similar curve exists for runner's paychecks with similar placement for Usain Bolt.

alkonaut 12y ago

In a team sports the bell curve difference is magnified through competition. A team with members all 10% "better" than the opposition (by some measure) could win 99% of the games. So once you count wins as the only deliverable, they are 100x better, not 10% better! You could argue that programming is also competitive; a business that is 10% more efficient will routinely win contracts against the opposition, better their reputation etc. Elite developers exist as it would be ridiculous to think that talent can't be found in this field. Like learning a spoken language, some become fluent in months while others never do. And I think talent is probably at least as relevant than it is in sports. The question is merely what leverage a talented programmer can get from say a 10% or 100% advantage over the average skill or productivity? Completing tasks as an individual is one thing, being in a team is something else, and competing as a team will further increase the leverage of skill. The 10x-average developer likely does not exist. Developers that produce 2-3x the average developer are probably common. What we forget is that those don't necessarily produce business value at that rate (which they solve problems), but like I explained above: being the winning team in competition could give increased returns by thousands of percent.