
The 100x Engineer - zef_hemel
http://100x.engineering
======
jitl
Worth reading. This is not some sort of claim of “wow I am Jeff Dean the 100x
engineer”. Rather it is a discussion of the myths of 10x engineers, and how to
actually think about contributing productivity at a high level.

------
btschaegg
As a Sidenote:

    
    
      Microsoft Applications: “[...] and 0.5 defect per KLOC  [...] in released product (Moore 1992).”
    

It might just be me, but I somehow have the feeling that hasn't been true for
a loooong time.

Edit: Also, I somehow have the feeling that the quote about defects per KLOC
isn't really helping.

From what I see regularly, the business side of things is almost never
interested in the "0 defects per .5 MLOC" of the last part, especially if
you're considering what the implications must be for the amount of time it
takes to produce that level of quality (even more so if you assume some form
of waterfall development, as it's attributed to 1990).

I really like what the author is saying after that (because he focuses on much
more important factors) but that only makes this specific quote seem more
misplaced to me.

------
minimaxir
Is the author implying that he himself is a "100x Engineer"?

~~~
AlexCoventry
No, he's just outlining some desiderata for effective organizational behavior
for engineers.

------
oktobercrisis
I couldn't take the article seriously due to the absolute idiocy of the term
'100x Engineer.'

~~~
naugtur
When a term seems silly to me I replace it with cauliflower and proceed. After
all, language is all arbitrary.

