4 ms·

>But that would mean that programming skill is somehow distributed on a U-shaped curve. Most people are at one end or the other, which doesn't make much sense.

>But that would mean that programming skill is somehow distributed on a U-shaped curve. Most people are at one end or the other, which doesn't make much sense. But this is exactly the case! It's why Fizz Buzz exists: to determine if you're on the left leg or the right of the U-curve. (Or similar curve wherein people "suck at programming" or that they "rock at programming", without leaving any room for those in between. Everyone is either an amazing programmer or "a worthless use of a seat" [in a programming job]). Why can't we accept that this is the nature of progrmaming? Jobs wasn't a coder, and was on the left side of the U. Wozniak was and was on the right side. Brian Chesky (airbnb co-founder) can't code, is on the left side of the U. Nathan Blecharczyk (another airbnb co-founder) can. There is nothing exceptional about this distribution. You can have a ton of vision and product input, design input (as Brian did) without being on the right side of the U as a coder yourself. On the other hand, perhaps all coders on the right side of the U are all awesome, which is why they command six figure salaries sooner out of college than other professions take to get a terminal degree in their field.

whyaduck 12y ago
FizzBuzz is a test, not the results. If you can point to a study that has administered it to a well selected group representative of professional software engineers that displays a bi-modal distribution, then I'll accept that as evidence. Until then, it's just anecdotal data about the quality of a self-selected group attempting to get a well paid job.
- logicallee 12y ago
  Fizz Buzz is a pass/fail test that wouldn't even exist if the pool being tested weren't bimodal. Why would anyone administer the Fizz Buzz test to a normal distribution of programming skills, for example? (I mean https://www.google.com/search?q=normal+distribution https://www.google.com/search?q=normal+distribution) It would make no sense - below what part of the normal curve of programmers would you put someone who failed at FizzBuzz (cannot code it)? In my interpretation it's because programming skill doesn't follow a normal (bell-shaped) distribution, but is bimodal. Which is why Fizz Buzz exists, to tell you quickly which pool (left or right) your candidate is from. Either that or we have a completely different interpretation of why Fizz Buzz exists or what it means. Why do you think it exists?

whyaduck 12y ago

FizzBuzz is a test, not the results. If you can point to a study that has administered it to a well selected group representative of professional software engineers that displays a bi-modal distribution, then I'll accept that as evidence. Until then, it's just anecdotal data about the quality of a self-selected group attempting to get a well paid job.

logicallee 12y ago
Fizz Buzz is a pass/fail test that wouldn't even exist if the pool being tested weren't bimodal. Why would anyone administer the Fizz Buzz test to a normal distribution of programming skills, for example? (I mean https://www.google.com/search?q=normal+distribution https://www.google.com/search?q=normal+distribution) It would make no sense - below what part of the normal curve of programmers would you put someone who failed at FizzBuzz (cannot code it)? In my interpretation it's because programming skill doesn't follow a normal (bell-shaped) distribution, but is bimodal. Which is why Fizz Buzz exists, to tell you quickly which pool (left or right) your candidate is from. Either that or we have a completely different interpretation of why Fizz Buzz exists or what it means. Why do you think it exists?