undefined | Better HN

0 pointsfouric4y ago0 comments

> while it's inherently a super-subjective metric, I would say that 10x programmers do exist

Even worse than super-subjective, it seems like people don't agree on the definition of "10x programmer".

Is that 10x value (code * code quality) produced per unit of work-time? Per brain cycle? Are you controlling for programmer experience, or domain knowledge, as [1] pointed out? Do you actually mean 10x, or is that a stand-in for "significantly more productive" with an unknown value? Do you include collaborative skills and working with a team, or even entirely base your definition off of that?

I'm both curious as to the exact definition you have in mind, and also trying to point out the more general issue so that others arguing past each other can realize that they have two different ideas in mind.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28797923

0 comments

Jensson4y ago

Have a 1 year project. One side is a team of 10 developers with 5 years of experience in the field. Other side is 1 developer with 5 years of experience in the field. Do you think it is unreasonable that there is any developer that could beat the team in that situation? The quality expectations for both are the same, so no shortcuts.

I don't find that unreasonable at all, most teams are very unproductive. So what I'd call it is "A 10x developer is a developer who can outperform a typical team of 10 developers".

pjc504y ago

For me, it's definitely "a stand-in for "significantly more productive" with an unknown value". Neither the input nor the output can be properly quantified, and we don't really know the full set of variables to control for, and it inevitably runs into serious questions of inequality, SES, and background that are likely to make people even more cross.

I see it as more of a compliment. Nobody should be seriously and unironically calling themselves a 10x programmer, it should be bestowed by other people.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse