Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by silvestrov 465 days ago
10x is not about the number of lines produced.

It is about programming languages and tools, about database design/schemas.

Choose the wrong language/tool for the job and the amount of work needed to solve the job easily expands 10x.

Guido van Rossum and James Gosling and Anders Hejlsberg likely have reduced the amount of work by 10x for a lot of projects compared to implementing them in a lower level programming language.
2 comments
TrackerFF 465 days ago
10x is not literal - the origins is from the 60s, and stem from some study where the best engineer was found to be 10x more productive than the worst engineer.

Average, is of course relative to the sample. If some "elite" company only hires 10x engineers, there's likely not going to be any 10x engineers there. The most productive engineer will probably only be slightly more productive than the worst.

If some other company has zero standards for hiring, to a degree where you can basically pick anyone off the streets and put them to code, the best will probably Nx (where N is very large) more productive than the worst.

But even then, there are so many dimensions and aspects to this.

link
whatnow37373 465 days ago
Being 10x as productive then has more to do with your position than your skills.

The Roman emperor could make or break entire regions by vaguely wagging a few fingers. If and when he made a good decision - which could often easily be attributed to good luck - he could be, and was, heralded as the best thing since sliced bread because he saved millions. Such power surely must be divine. I don't think so.

Not saying Linus or Guido aren't competent engineers. I'm just saying that I don't think they are the sliced bread many make them out to be. They are good. Lots of people are good, but not many people get to be the first to create Python.

And, to be frank, Python - and its ecosystem - and me are through the honeymoon phase. Let's just say the chemistry has worn off and I'm not quite so sure Guido is the net positive we think he is. Maybe Python replaced some other upcoming far superior language. We can't know. (I suspect it did.)

In general I don't think individual/personality worship is a net positive on any axis.

link