> means that a 1x developer will take around 10 hours to get to the same place
A "workaround" isn't an adequate substitute for actual the understanding and fixing of the root cause of a bug.
What you think is a 10x developer is, in fact, a short-term 10x developer, medium-term 1x developer, long-term -10x developer. Their work while seemingly great at first is just accrued debt with an incredibly high interest rate. But they're rarely the ones fixing it.
Now, like everything, a balance needs to be struck between spending hours fixing a bug _the right way_, or, finding a temporary workaround. The real 10x developer is incredibly good at finding this balance.
> A "workaround" isn't an adequate substitute for actual the understanding and fixing of the root cause of a bug.
Right, hence why we recognize that a 10x developer is a weaker developer. Was there something that implied that a weak developer is a substitute for a talented developer for you to say this, or are you just pulling words out of thin air?
'a weaker developer' is the opposite of the standard definition of 'a 10x developer'. if you are going to use phrases to mean the opposite of their conventional meaning you should warn people so they can avoid arguing with you on the assumption that you're using them to mean what everyone else uses them to mean
Why is the onus on me to try and hold back those who don't know how to think straight from getting into an argument with a straw man? They could, you know, just not do it.
Rather than encourage a dumbing down the content to the lowest common denominator, why not encourage those with low comprehension to not get into arguments in the first place? Dumbing down the content does not improve the quality of discourse. That is a entirely flawed notion. Hacker News is decidedly intended for a hacker audience, not an audience of high school debate team hopefuls. There should be no harm in speaking to hackers at their level.
Merely arguing about your _definition_ of 10x engineer and 1x engineer.
Your original comment at the top of the thread implies the engineer who wrote the blog post is a 1x engineer because they spent so much time finding and fixing this bug.
Yes, and as the comment before it asserts, most engineers would never take that kind of time. They'd bang out some workaround as quickly as possible and move on with life.
But my original comment at the top also praised the value of the 1x engineer; noting that the rest of us could learn a thing or two from them. There is no denying that 1x developers are the better developers.
The question remains outstanding: Where did you pick up the suggestion that the quick fix is a suitable replacement for the talented engineers who can fully understand a problem that prompted the rebuttal?
Emm, 10x developer is a myth. The real 10x developer is the one that creates such an infrastructure/libraries/culture that enables 10 other engineers to move fast. The 10x developer is not the person that is 10x faster than other developers on the code base simply because they can hold the spaghetti code they wrote in their head.
