20 ms·
My point was to refute the assertion that it's "because developers don't run companies in general." If we're going to add lots of caveats to what 'developer' m
by amirmc 11y ago
My point was to refute the assertion that it's "because developers don't run companies in general." If we're going to add lots of caveats to what 'developer' means, then we're essentially making a 'No true scotsman argument' -- (i.e. Zuck hasn't worked anywhere else, and is ostensibly a manager now).
- frostmatthew 11y agoOh sorry, I certainly didn't mean to suggest he isn't a "true" developer - I'm sure he could code circles around me. I meant only that you were pointing to Facebook as a "direct counterpoint" to the suggestion that "developers don't run companies in general" - and it's not a great counterpoint because he's not going into the office every day and writing code, and hasn't since Facebook was a small/early-stage startup (where open layouts make the most sense). i.e. he isn't making the decision as a developer, he's making it as a manager and the comment you were originally replying to was suggesting "for management cost and control would be more important considerations." [Though I'm not sure I entirely agree with that, as pointed out in my own reply to that comment]