Since you and I both love basketball, let me argue that Lebron James is a misleading example. You can create a very successful Valley company with 10X coders, and a solid plan. You don’t need an epochal talent such as Lebron or Steph. In fact, deluding yourself that you have that sort of talent (in your own person, or on your team) is a dangerous encouragement to cut corners re: testing, for example. The Warriors or the Spurs are brilliantly planned, capable of increasing the value of players such as Jeff Green or Andre Iguodala (or turning a raw talent such Kawhi Leonard into a superstar). This would never happen here. DC is not failing because it cannot attract 100X coders. It’s failing because it cannot attract 10X or even 2X coders. Superstars, of course, do not want to sit in a dingy SCIF, taking orders from a “program manager” or “architect,” but neither do solid, hard-working, 2x coders. The procurement system’s ability to demoralize and destroy the latter type is the real failing.

Can we agree to stop misusing the word “commodity” to mean simply “replaceable”? Programming talent is indeed a commodity, just as Lebron’s quantity of talent is a commodity, by definition, because he can sell on it on a fairly efficient market. In contrast, there is no way to sell your superior programming talent in the DC area: there is no employer who will pay you more, or give you the power of decision, in return for that talent, and no gov’t contract that will let you rise to your proper level.