There’s a debate on whether 10x software engineers exist.
They do: I’ve seen several of them.
And their existence freaks the hell out of me. 5 examples of 10x engineers and why you should be afraid when you see one:
1. The Move-Fast-And-Leave-Behind. A dev with a hacks mindset at a scaleup. They get shit done 10x faster than the engineers who that take this (literally) shit over when it needs to scale, try to reverse engineer it, but ultimately have to toss and rewrite the whole thing.
2. The That’s Trivial To Finish. Someone w many product-minded traits blog.pragmaticengineer.com/the-product-mi… amazing at prototyping and telling the non-technical manager they’ve done 90% of the work, and the other devs should have no problem finishing the last 10%. Which then takes 10x as long.
3. The Only Non Quitter. A company a terrible eng culture and just as bad codebase which oversells itself. Devs quit all the time and the new joiners struggle with everything. Save for TONQ who gets stuff done. Obviously the most tenured dev, and the only one lasting >2 years.
4. The Debugging Machine. A place with a codebase w no tests or documentation. New joiners tend to break everything and TDM needs to be called in to save the day. An engineer who has been around for years, though refuses to ever document/share any of their well-earned knowledge.
5. The Story Point Hoarder. A company where productivity == story points shipped. A tenured engineer who figured out how to make sure every second sprint they claim 5-10x as many story points as most other team members through cherry-picking work, optimising for these points.
So yes, 10x engineers do exist. They live in a mostly unhealthy engineering environments allowing for 10x behaviours.
If the above examples proved anything it’s how we should not ask: “how can we have more 10x devs?”, but answer “why are most our devs at 0.1x productivity?”
10x devs share the trait of being tenured at a company, and being perceived 10x as efficient as most new joiners.
Which begs the questions: 1. Why does an engineer need years of work at the company to get productive? 2. Is perception == reality?
Those are the 10x questions.
2 more archetypes: 6. The Reinvent The Wheel Dev. One of the first engineers at a startup who decides to reinvent the wheel. Writes a custom SPA framework, with layer, MVC abstraction. Then gets everything done 10x faster than new hires (who they label as “not smart enough”)
7. The Stupidly Hard Worker. Typically someone who is also #1 or #6 at some level. They work 12+ hour days, also through most weekends. Management loves them as they’re clearly devoted to the company, and ignores any complaints because this hard work & perceived 10x output.
Finally, my observation on what a highly productive engineer can look like (who I would not call 10x):
So predictable that we’ll see an explosion of digital products selling “ideas for million dollar businesses” that you can “just vibe code quickly”.
Basically: “buy my digital product for $500, spend $1,500 on Lovable / Claude Code and become a millionaire.”
Another hype train
Ofc these products promoted by influencers will work just as well as crypto sh*tcoins launched by influencers in 2023.
We’ll see doctored evidence (“someone who built one of ideas idea is at $5K MRR after 2 weeks”) and nontechnical people will spend thousands for $0 in return
The predictable winners: AI infra companies! Lovable, Vercel (with v0), Claude Code, Cursor, Replit, Gemini and any and all products that (at least partially) position themselves as “AI tools to build your idea that work even if you’re not a developer”
And it’s stated. A gold rush where - and the surest winners are those selling the shovels!
I generally like Anthropic: but the more they paint a dystopian future where AI “manages” people (“AI middle-managers”) the more I am starting to think they are losing their marbles.
LLMs is a tool humans should use. The tail should not wag the dog; Anthropic should know better
And frankly I’m getting tired of Anthropic being loud about how their AI will lead to mass unemployment, and while claiming to be a responsible lab to develop AI.
If your master plan is to wipe out the labor market for profit: you’re not responsible.
I DO feel recently that Anthropic is the single least responsible lab out there.
Thanks to their CEO parroting how their AI will lead to massive job losses: not being concerned the least, and seemingly *wanting* this outcome (even if it’s not realistic).
I am hearing SO many stories about people realizing coding with AI tools (aka “vibe coding”) is a game changer after “reviving” an old side project or idea on the side and making so much progress
But… while I often hear the excitement on starting: not hearing “finished” often!
Almost like these tools were amazing at making rapid progress at first… but it still takes a ton of effort to finish things and feels like most people go back to leaving side projects unfinished (even if in a more advanced state?)
FWIW guilty as charged
I got a bunch of side projects “revived” and was amazed at how fast it was
Then I just… kind of let them on the side? Turns out the reason I don’t touch them is because… they are just not a focus. Even tho it’s less effort now: still effort!!