I don't think there's much demand for having awesome engineers.
-
-
Replying to @bitemyapp
@bitemyapp because it is believed that good enough engineers produce good enough systems?1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @alexisgallagher
@alexisgallagher to be satisfied with this means an impoverished imagination on the part of the PMs and executives at the company.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @bitemyapp
@bitemyapp I think the real error there is it underestimates risk. Routine projects fail, a lot. “Straightforward” is often an illusion.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @alexisgallagher
@alexisgallagher are your risks higher or lower with better programmers?1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @bitemyapp
@bitemyapp right, that’s my claim. The value in “overspending” on quality of engineer is it reduces risks latent even in “easy” projects.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @alexisgallagher
@bitemyapp (this may be delusion. Smarts can just make fancier bugs. E.g., Scalaz?)1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @alexisgallagher
@alexisgallagher So use Haskell. Not Scalaz's fault that Scala is awful. They're just making the best of a bad situation.3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @bitemyapp
@alexisgallagher Taking a moment to highlight how absurd that sentiment is. Smarter engineers just make fancier bugs. Christ.@dibblego1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @bitemyapp
@bitemyapp@dibblego I do actually believe this. Quite curious if others do not?1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
@alexisgallagher @bitemyapp False equivalence fallacy. I have not much patience for such sloppy reasoning.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.