[geebee]

The part about "Creators, not builders" resonates with me, and it used to make me very resentful when people viewed me as a producer of the codes rather than as a contributor to the creation of a product. The author of this piece is absolutely correct that most people got into software because they realized they could create, not because they could build up someone else's idea.

That said, this bothers me much less than it used to, largely because I see it as a choice rather than something that is imposed on me. There are plenty of opportunities to create if that's what I want to do - but I understand that this doesn't tend to happen when someone directly pays me money to write code.

Why does someone hire a software developer? Almost always because they have an idea about some software they'd like to have written, and they are unable to do it themselves, which is why they're giving the developer the money in exchange for working code.

I certainly don't think this is how the best software is written. I'm under the impression that many ycombinator applicants (as well as google and facebook) start with programmers creating version 1 of the product that will eventually become a company. A couple of business guys thinking up an idea and then hiring a programmer to "code it up" doesn't seem to be the winning formula.

But I've come to understand that if I want to produce the codes in exchange for the moneys, I shouldn't be too resentful that my insights into the product aren't really what I was hired for.

Now, I do think this is a perfectly good reason for a developer to leave and look for a new gig. I just wouldn't be resentful about it.