Do 10x programmers exist? Says Who?
Interesting debate started by Gary Bernhardt on Twitter yesterday
Based on his understanding of the origin of the concept, it seemed to me that Gary Bernhardt doesn’t really hold a lot of respect for the idea of the 10x programmer. While his understanding of the origin of the concept might be accurate, I beleive that 10x programmers exist. Not because I have the talent to evaluate a 10x programmer (I don’t, I’m just a struggling hobbyist in the world of computer science). Rather, in my experience, there are certain people in every profession who stand head and shoulders above their colleagues and in the world of computer science the label “10x programmer” is one trendy short hand way of referring to such people by members of the programming community (see for example http://www.quora.com/search?q=10x+programmer). I replied to Gary that even if the concept has questionable origins, programmers know from their experience that certain of their colleagues are just better.
It was here where the debate becomes more interesting. In his reply, Gary suggests that the experience of the programming community is essentially meaningless in deciding whether there are such things as 10x programmers. My reference to the experience/observations of programmers as a form of proof that the 10x programmer exists was mildly ridiculed by Gary, who suggested it was just as reliable as experience of doctors who observed bloodletting to be an effective form of medical treatment
Leaving the intended humor of his tweet aside for the moment, Gary’s response is interesting because he rejects the experience of a large community of people based on the experience and knowledge of one enlightened person (that being himself). If you assert that you’ve encountered someone who fits the description of the 10x programmer then your experience is devalued, but it’s valid for Gary (who in his travels in the programming world never seems to have met anyone who fits the description) to rely on his experience to argue the concept is flawed.
To be honest, I didn’t think Gary’s reply was entirely genuine because it referred to the completely irrelevant example of bloodletting. Does he use that example anytime anyone uses personal experience to support a position that he disagrees with? I also thought it a weak reply because it doesn’t really advance the argument in anyway. The comparison seems intended to derail any serious conversation. I told him I didn’t think it a very good reply
After that, Gary blocked me and, interestingly, was kind enough to provide a explanation for the block, namely that I have a “weak standard of truth”:
So Gary didn’t block me because I openly disagreed with him (in a polite way), but rather because I valued the experience of a (presumably large) segment of the programming community over the experience of Gary Bernhardt, in other words, I preferred the “weak standard of truth” over Gary’s experience. Ironically the person who rejects the concept of the 10x programmer uses logic that implies his experience is more valid than other people’s, as if he were a 10x human being who’s experience of the world is the “strong standard of the truth.”
