What If Drivers Were Hired Like Programmers?(blog.jitbit.com)
blog.jitbit.com
What If Drivers Were Hired Like Programmers?
http://blog.jitbit.com/2011/05/what-if-drivers-were-hired-like.html
48 comments
computer science is one of the few areas where one person can solve a problem literally one million times as fast as another, if you measure in running time.
i'm not sure what you're arguing. that a professional programmer could optimize a program to be a million times faster than an unskilled programmer? or that the program would run a tiny bit faster but over the life of the program running continuously, it would do a million times more work?
a professional racecar driver racing around a circuit could finish a lap 10 seconds faster than an unskilled driver. over the course of a 24-hour endurance race, those 10 seconds would add up to a lot of time.
i'm not sure what you're arguing. that a professional programmer could optimize a program to be a million times faster than an unskilled programmer? or that the program would run a tiny bit faster but over the life of the program running continuously, it would do a million times more work?
a professional racecar driver racing around a circuit could finish a lap 10 seconds faster than an unskilled driver. over the course of a 24-hour endurance race, those 10 seconds would add up to a lot of time.
Well, in driving, the ultimate time ratio would not be a million fold or even close, even taken over the entire lifetimes of driver 1 and 2. An extreme differential would be 10X.
There are a few different ways to formulate the comparison in CS. For simplicity, consider a one-time eigenvalue computation on a large matrix (used for Pagerank and many other things). You could measure the total time from sitting down at the computer to having the numbers flow out onto the monitor. Let's consider the ratio of total time taken by skilled programmer one vs. unskilled programmer two.
The first obvious point is that many unskilled programmers wil not even be able to formulate the problem, leading to a ratio of infinity (i.e. any solution by programmer one will be infinitely faster than no solution).
Contrast to the driving example. Legions of smart engineers have made driving as simple as turning a key. So driver one and two will both be able to get started.
You can continue the analogy. As the size of the matrix gets larger, some programmer twos will get bogged down in trying to compute every eigenvalue, while programmer one uses something like the Arnoldi-Lanczos algorithm to pull out only the ones they need. Depending on matrix size this can quickly become literally one million times as fast as the naive solution.
This is not a theoretical example, but very similar to the tech behind Kaltix, one of Google's first acquisitions. It's not too hard to find many more examples. Moreover, this is for just one problem; when accumulated over time as in the hypothetical driver comparison, the ratios get even greater.
There are a few different ways to formulate the comparison in CS. For simplicity, consider a one-time eigenvalue computation on a large matrix (used for Pagerank and many other things). You could measure the total time from sitting down at the computer to having the numbers flow out onto the monitor. Let's consider the ratio of total time taken by skilled programmer one vs. unskilled programmer two.
The first obvious point is that many unskilled programmers wil not even be able to formulate the problem, leading to a ratio of infinity (i.e. any solution by programmer one will be infinitely faster than no solution).
Contrast to the driving example. Legions of smart engineers have made driving as simple as turning a key. So driver one and two will both be able to get started.
You can continue the analogy. As the size of the matrix gets larger, some programmer twos will get bogged down in trying to compute every eigenvalue, while programmer one uses something like the Arnoldi-Lanczos algorithm to pull out only the ones they need. Depending on matrix size this can quickly become literally one million times as fast as the naive solution.
This is not a theoretical example, but very similar to the tech behind Kaltix, one of Google's first acquisitions. It's not too hard to find many more examples. Moreover, this is for just one problem; when accumulated over time as in the hypothetical driver comparison, the ratios get even greater.
There are two very different hiring processes for developers, companies with competent technical people with authority can test applicants (and read their github) and hire on that basis.
But if a company isn't comfortable/capable of measuring someone's abilities, it's easy to get caught in a spiral of lax recruiters, exaggerated resumes and skill creep.
But if a company isn't comfortable/capable of measuring someone's abilities, it's easy to get caught in a spiral of lax recruiters, exaggerated resumes and skill creep.
"I see here you have several years experience driving Volvo, Ford, Volkswagen, Opel and Toyota. I'm sorry, but we're looking for a Honda driver."
"Must have ten+ years of Tesla driving experience."
Before everyone gets all uppety about this post, please take 30 seconds to chucle about it. Then, instead of saying how the industry is so screwed up remember that there are certain jobs where being master-of-all-trades is at least a good nice to have. For example a front-end specialist or a DBA may not be who a startup looking for its first employee might need.
Lastly, reject any job ad that requires 20 years of RoR experience. Instead focus on what the company does. If it is interesting to you, apply. I found that most employers arbitrarily choose requirements, and I just avoid all that want certifications: they tend to be too enterprisy for my taste.
For web people: look at what the perspective employer's product is using for language/framework. It is easy to do and will win you points. It will also help you avoid maintaining legacy systems running on NT if that's not your thing.
Lastly, reject any job ad that requires 20 years of RoR experience. Instead focus on what the company does. If it is interesting to you, apply. I found that most employers arbitrarily choose requirements, and I just avoid all that want certifications: they tend to be too enterprisy for my taste.
For web people: look at what the perspective employer's product is using for language/framework. It is easy to do and will win you points. It will also help you avoid maintaining legacy systems running on NT if that's not your thing.
As someone who tries to be a master of all, I don't see anything ridiculous about the requirements. If your passion is cars, you're likely to have some knowledge in all of those areas just because you love cars, if for no other reason.
What I found funny, and unfortunately all too true, was the pay offering. They want it all, but are only willing to pay slightly above minimum wage to get it.
What I found funny, and unfortunately all too true, was the pay offering. They want it all, but are only willing to pay slightly above minimum wage to get it.
If your passion is cars, you're likely to have some knowledge in all of those areas just because you love cars, if for no other reason.
So, a person who is applying to a driving position should be so passionate about 'cars' that they should have a background in rally driving and heavy tanks?
I think this reveals your ignorance of vehicles. Similarly, I think the sort of job posts that this post is mocking reveal an ignorance on the part of whoever is posting the ad.
So, a person who is applying to a driving position should be so passionate about 'cars' that they should have a background in rally driving and heavy tanks?
I think this reveals your ignorance of vehicles. Similarly, I think the sort of job posts that this post is mocking reveal an ignorance on the part of whoever is posting the ad.
While karma is meaningless, I appreciate your reply instead of just voting me down. I was wondering what was wrong with my post and appreciate any feedback that can help me provide better comments in the future.
In my experience, those who are passionate about a topic want to learn about all of the topics surrounding that topic. If you like to drive, you're probably going to want to know what makes a car tick and even get your hands dirty. I know that's not true of everyone, but generally speaking, I think it is.
You don't have to be passionate about driving to be a good driver. However, given the choice, why wouldn't you want to hire the guy who lives and breaths cars if they are also an excellent driver? Their additional skills will not hurt to have around, even if they are not directly applicable to the job at hand.
If you are at all interested in the job, you're going to apply no matter what the ad says is required. However, the long list of requirements gives you some insight into what the company does. Asking for a C++ programmer could mean anything, but if you also need MySQL experience, you've got a good indicator that you're going to be writing code that interfaces with a database. This helps you weed out the candidates offering jobs you may not be at all interested in.
In my experience, those who are passionate about a topic want to learn about all of the topics surrounding that topic. If you like to drive, you're probably going to want to know what makes a car tick and even get your hands dirty. I know that's not true of everyone, but generally speaking, I think it is.
You don't have to be passionate about driving to be a good driver. However, given the choice, why wouldn't you want to hire the guy who lives and breaths cars if they are also an excellent driver? Their additional skills will not hurt to have around, even if they are not directly applicable to the job at hand.
If you are at all interested in the job, you're going to apply no matter what the ad says is required. However, the long list of requirements gives you some insight into what the company does. Asking for a C++ programmer could mean anything, but if you also need MySQL experience, you've got a good indicator that you're going to be writing code that interfaces with a database. This helps you weed out the candidates offering jobs you may not be at all interested in.
If you like to drive, you're probably going to want to know what makes a car tick and even get your hands dirty.
1) I know several people who are absolute car nuts. Some of them are excellent drivers. Few of them do their own 'dirty' work. (note: I do my own dirty work, but I realize that has less to do with a passion for cars than a passion for independence and understanding systems)
2) That has nothing to do with the article that was posted. Reread it. Note the bit about rally, tanks, and F1 experience as a plus.
the long list of requirements gives you some insight into what the company does
That really doesn't have much to do with the original post, either. It's talking about the (sometimes/often) ridiculous specificity and enormous range of requirements you'll find in job postings. Employers complain of being unable to find "good candidates," yet they'll reject a senior engineer for lacking one bulleted item, regardless of its complexity in relationship to the other requirements. In my experience, this is largely caused by the HR gateway and general incompetence in first-tier candidate selection.
Similarly, refusing to interview a candidate for a bus driver position because the person has no experience driving tanks would be silly.
1) I know several people who are absolute car nuts. Some of them are excellent drivers. Few of them do their own 'dirty' work. (note: I do my own dirty work, but I realize that has less to do with a passion for cars than a passion for independence and understanding systems)
2) That has nothing to do with the article that was posted. Reread it. Note the bit about rally, tanks, and F1 experience as a plus.
the long list of requirements gives you some insight into what the company does
That really doesn't have much to do with the original post, either. It's talking about the (sometimes/often) ridiculous specificity and enormous range of requirements you'll find in job postings. Employers complain of being unable to find "good candidates," yet they'll reject a senior engineer for lacking one bulleted item, regardless of its complexity in relationship to the other requirements. In my experience, this is largely caused by the HR gateway and general incompetence in first-tier candidate selection.
Similarly, refusing to interview a candidate for a bus driver position because the person has no experience driving tanks would be silly.
I'm sure if a team of skilled driver/mechanic hybrids was the difference between a mediocre or failed business, and multi-multi-million-dollar paydays, the market would be much more competitive and employers would feel the need to have such outsized "obligatories."
In other words, the subtle critique of the job market isn't really accurate. "What if clowns were hired like programmers?" "What if Wal-Mart greeters were hired like programmers?" Invalid.
More precise would be, "What if [carpenters|plumbers|machinists|general contractors] were hired like programmers?" The writeup on that topic wouldn't be quite so snarky, I think.
In other words, the subtle critique of the job market isn't really accurate. "What if clowns were hired like programmers?" "What if Wal-Mart greeters were hired like programmers?" Invalid.
More precise would be, "What if [carpenters|plumbers|machinists|general contractors] were hired like programmers?" The writeup on that topic wouldn't be quite so snarky, I think.
I think the article is alluding to the wide span of requirements which is quite impossible to achieve in any field, even if you are a programmer. But thats not really the case in the real world, altough I have seen some job ads like that, where they sought people with experience in x86 assembly, C# and database modelling as well as front-end development.
> I have seen some job ads like that, where they sought people with experience in x86 assembly, C# and database modelling as well as front-end development.
When I read specific and unlikely combinations of required experience like that, I always think "I wonder who's had that ad written in support of their H1B application?"
When I read specific and unlikely combinations of required experience like that, I always think "I wonder who's had that ad written in support of their H1B application?"
> I have seen some job ads like that, where they sought people with experience in x86 assembly, C# and database modelling as well as front-end development.
Finding people with that combination of skills is impossible? Unlikely, sure, but... I have those skills. In fact, I did everything from x86 asm to Python to DB work to writing a complete web frontend in my last startup (while I was the only tech person). Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised to see this constellation of skills in a number of startup founders, where you have to wear many hats.
Finding people with that combination of skills is impossible? Unlikely, sure, but... I have those skills. In fact, I did everything from x86 asm to Python to DB work to writing a complete web frontend in my last startup (while I was the only tech person). Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised to see this constellation of skills in a number of startup founders, where you have to wear many hats.
I know what it's alluding to. It's just 1). silly to compare hiring a programmer to hiring a car driver for many reasons and 2). very unlikely anyone would hire a job posting for a [front-end dev|HTML&CSS|customer support] (choose your own metaphor) who has experience in kernel programming, which is what this faulty metaphor is alluding to.
It may happen, but I'd be surprised if it's regular enough to be considered how programmers are hired.
It may happen, but I'd be surprised if it's regular enough to be considered how programmers are hired.
The link exaggerates, but web developer positions often require knowledge of every tool in the chain from the server to Photoshop and Flash. You have to be the front-end art guy and the front-end implementation guy and the back-end coder and the DBA and the system administrator, for $10-$12 per hour or less if it's a fixed-payment contract.
Really? $10-12/hr? That's about what my internship pays. I've seen ridiculous job listings ("Developer needed -- M.S. in Computer Science required, PhD preferred"-type listing for what seem to be pretty standard programming jobs), but I assume they were paying significantly more than $10/12 hr
My memory for the wage scale was stuck around 2002-2003, so add a decade's worth of inflation.
With all respect, I think either the salary or the requirements have been exaggerated in the retelling since then.
10$-12$ an hour? really? it's less then I got when I was seventeen, and I don't even live in the US.
In Norway, you can actually be sentenced to jail for paying those wages. Though I've only seen fines being applied in practice.
"I'm sure if a team of skilled driver/mechanic hybrids was the difference between a mediocre or failed business, and multi-multi-million-dollar paydays"
That's because your buying into the meme stating a good programmer is worth 100 times more (totally arbitrary btw) a mediocre one. Or something like that.
All this dates back to "Wozniak/Allen" can write a basic compiler in a weekend falacy. And of course the brass ring multi million dollar payday that everyone wants even if they go down in flames (and most of course will).
The point being made seems to be that there is a tendency in help wanted advertising to try to get the entire kitchen sink.
That's because your buying into the meme stating a good programmer is worth 100 times more (totally arbitrary btw) a mediocre one. Or something like that.
All this dates back to "Wozniak/Allen" can write a basic compiler in a weekend falacy. And of course the brass ring multi million dollar payday that everyone wants even if they go down in flames (and most of course will).
The point being made seems to be that there is a tendency in help wanted advertising to try to get the entire kitchen sink.
I'm not really sure it's a "meme" that the worth of a programmer is an exponential function of his skill. Seems like I've read that this is the case (not 100 times more, never heard that, that's your own rhetoric coloring your faulty interpretation of what I said) many times over from articles linked right here on HackerNews.
I'm not going to argue with you about whether or not a skilled programmer is much, much more valuable than a mediocre/apathetic one, because that would be the world's silliest argument. A skilled anything is much, much more valuable than a mediocre and disinterested one.
I'm not going to argue with you about whether or not a skilled programmer is much, much more valuable than a mediocre/apathetic one, because that would be the world's silliest argument. A skilled anything is much, much more valuable than a mediocre and disinterested one.
What I'm referring to actually is an old quote attributed to Bill Gates :
"A great lathe operator commands several times the wage of an average lathe operator, but a great writer of software code is worth 10,000 times the price of an average software writer."
...which I've seen variations of lately.
"A great lathe operator commands several times the wage of an average lathe operator, but a great writer of software code is worth 10,000 times the price of an average software writer."
...which I've seen variations of lately.
There have been probably several hundred multimillion dollar acquisitions in the valley over the last 5-6 years. It's not that rare. And many of those were talent acquisitions. Which seems to support Mr. Deboard's point.
But that is rare when compared to the number of people who are in the game. Similar to sports and entertainment business for that matter. The chance of hitting it big drives entire industries.
This is ridiculous. Of course drivers won't have all that; they're just drivers. In computer terms, a car driver is not like a programmer, but rather more like a touch typist. Of course you wouldn't expect a person whose job is typing on keyboards to understand anything about how the internet works or what databases are.
It's one thing to be able to do anything, but it's something else to have actually done it. There are only so many hours in a day.
I, and many others, can make a great deal of progress on anything in a week, but I wonder when looking at these ads, how many jobs must one have had in order to be experienced with so many different technologies?
Programming is about constant learning. How many of us have gone a single day without looking something up? What a programmer can learn is as important as what he has learned.
I, and many others, can make a great deal of progress on anything in a week, but I wonder when looking at these ads, how many jobs must one have had in order to be experienced with so many different technologies?
Programming is about constant learning. How many of us have gone a single day without looking something up? What a programmer can learn is as important as what he has learned.
If you do project-based work professionally, each project can come with its own set of technologies and related experiences. Combine that with a few personal side using another set of technologies, and the array of technologies you are experienced with can grow pretty rapidly.
The compensation part is incorrect. It should be "Depends on experience".
If you were a driver, wouldn't you want to be that awesome of a driver?
"If car drivers were hired like programmers, then a single failed deploy (car crash) would be enough to be fired!"
--Senior Expert in Italian cuisine and consumables distribution for Round Table Pizza.
--Senior Expert in Italian cuisine and consumables distribution for Round Table Pizza.
I really dislike this submission (flagged). It's facile humour, but only just barely funny. I found myself wishing people who upvoted it could be banished. But that thought gave me another.
What would a layering / segmentation of HN users look like? Imagine the voting history of HN users on certain types of articles was used to classify them, and each classification of user saw a version of HN customized to only users of their classification, including front page articles, comment and new submissions, in a transparent way similar to hell-banning?
Probably too elitist and conducive to groupthink, but worth an idle ponder.
What would a layering / segmentation of HN users look like? Imagine the voting history of HN users on certain types of articles was used to classify them, and each classification of user saw a version of HN customized to only users of their classification, including front page articles, comment and new submissions, in a transparent way similar to hell-banning?
Probably too elitist and conducive to groupthink, but worth an idle ponder.
TED talk on this. guy calls it a "filter bubble": http://www.ted.com/talks/eli_pariser_beware_online_filter_bu... TL;DW: filter bubbles/group think might be bad for a functioning democracy because functioning democracies rely on good information
One of the things I like about HN is being exposed to ideas and projects outside of my usual circles of interest, things that don't show up in my RSS or twitter feeds. I'm pretty sure any segmentation system like that would just spit my narrow interests back at me.
I didn't find the link to be worth much, but it also took almost no time to read. It is hard for me to imagine any aggregator not having some poor content for any given reader, even if a filter was employed.
I didn't find the link to be worth much, but it also took almost no time to read. It is hard for me to imagine any aggregator not having some poor content for any given reader, even if a filter was employed.
I'm not so sure it would be the case, as it depends on what is being filtered for, but as I said, groupthink... At this point, one of HN's problems is simply scale; cities are qualitatively different to villages. Reddit has sub-reddits, but that just stages things explicitly. I wondered if something more subtle could work.
The submission itself is probably not HN-worthy. But it spawned an interesting discussion.
If we raise the stakes to race car drivers, then relevant knowledge on specific tracks, car types, with a performance record would probably be very applicable.
When you're trying to find the best of the best in both drivers or developers, the driver should definitely know about how all the components in his machine affect his performance. This also allows him to communicate his intent and any adjustments that he wants made with the rest of the team (mechanics, crew, etc.).
The problem comes when employers start looking for talent out of their league, like Greyhound trying to hire NASCAR drivers to drive their busses.
When you're trying to find the best of the best in both drivers or developers, the driver should definitely know about how all the components in his machine affect his performance. This also allows him to communicate his intent and any adjustments that he wants made with the rest of the team (mechanics, crew, etc.).
The problem comes when employers start looking for talent out of their league, like Greyhound trying to hire NASCAR drivers to drive their busses.
this is how job posts written by hr look like
We also have entry-level positions available; a Master's degree and a minimum of two years of full-time experience is required.
(I really see more and more low-level coder jobs require a Master's degree, at least more and more than I noticed before I got my Bachelor's)
(I really see more and more low-level coder jobs require a Master's degree, at least more and more than I noticed before I got my Bachelor's)
Yeah, it only takes 20 seconds of searching on Monster to bear witness to this phenomenon.
and then HR sends a bunch of kids with skates that doesn't even have drivers licenses.
and the hiring manager hires the one that reads the same car magazine as him because "he had to pick one on that hiring cycle"
can't wait to work only at the start up...
and the hiring manager hires the one that reads the same car magazine as him because "he had to pick one on that hiring cycle"
can't wait to work only at the start up...
And what if Microsoft made cars? (this is an old one)
At a recent COMDEX, Bill Gates reportedly compared the computer industry with the auto industry and stated: "If GM had kept up with technology like the computer industry has, we would all be driving twenty-five dollar cars that got 1000 miles to the gallon." In response to Bill's comments, General Motors issued a press release stating: If GM had developed technology like Microsoft, we would all be driving cars with the following characteristics:
1. For no reason whatsoever your car would crash twice a day.
2. Every time they repainted the lines on the road you would have to buy a new car.
3. Occasionally your car would die on the freeway for no reason, and you would just accept this, restart and drive on.
4. Occasionally, executing a maneuver such as a left turn, would cause your car to shut down and refuse to restart, in which case you would have to reinstall the engine.
5. Only one person at a time could use the car, unless you bought "Car95" or "CarNT." But then you would have to buy more seats.
6. Macintosh would make a car that was powered by the sun, reliable, five times as fast, and twice as easy to drive, but would only run on five per cent of the roads.
7. The oil, water temperature and alternator warning lights would be replaced by a single "general car default" warning light.
8. New seats would force everyone to have the same size butt.
9. The airbag system would say "Are you sure?" before going off.
10. Occasionally for no reason whatsoever, your car would lock you out and refuse to let you in until you simultaneously lifted the door handle, turned the key, and grab hold of the radio antenna.
11. GM would require all car buyers to also purchase a deluxe set of Rand McNally road maps (now a GM subsidiary), even though they neither need them nor want them. Attempting to delete this option would immediately cause the car's performance to diminish by 50% or more. Moreover, GM would become a target for investigation by the Justice Department.
12. Everytime GM introduced a new model car buyers would have to learn how to drive all over again because none of the controls would operate in the same manner as the old car.
13. You'd press the "start" button to shut off the engine.
At a recent COMDEX, Bill Gates reportedly compared the computer industry with the auto industry and stated: "If GM had kept up with technology like the computer industry has, we would all be driving twenty-five dollar cars that got 1000 miles to the gallon." In response to Bill's comments, General Motors issued a press release stating: If GM had developed technology like Microsoft, we would all be driving cars with the following characteristics:
1. For no reason whatsoever your car would crash twice a day.
2. Every time they repainted the lines on the road you would have to buy a new car.
3. Occasionally your car would die on the freeway for no reason, and you would just accept this, restart and drive on.
4. Occasionally, executing a maneuver such as a left turn, would cause your car to shut down and refuse to restart, in which case you would have to reinstall the engine.
5. Only one person at a time could use the car, unless you bought "Car95" or "CarNT." But then you would have to buy more seats.
6. Macintosh would make a car that was powered by the sun, reliable, five times as fast, and twice as easy to drive, but would only run on five per cent of the roads.
7. The oil, water temperature and alternator warning lights would be replaced by a single "general car default" warning light.
8. New seats would force everyone to have the same size butt.
9. The airbag system would say "Are you sure?" before going off.
10. Occasionally for no reason whatsoever, your car would lock you out and refuse to let you in until you simultaneously lifted the door handle, turned the key, and grab hold of the radio antenna.
11. GM would require all car buyers to also purchase a deluxe set of Rand McNally road maps (now a GM subsidiary), even though they neither need them nor want them. Attempting to delete this option would immediately cause the car's performance to diminish by 50% or more. Moreover, GM would become a target for investigation by the Justice Department.
12. Everytime GM introduced a new model car buyers would have to learn how to drive all over again because none of the controls would operate in the same manner as the old car.
13. You'd press the "start" button to shut off the engine.
>> 4. Occasionally, executing a maneuver such as a left turn, would cause your car to shut down...
I had one of those, a Plymouth Voyager. Going from our house in the mountains there was an intersection with a sharp down hill right turn. Sometimes the car would stall with a loss of power steering. My wife was small and she int like it all.
I had one of those, a Plymouth Voyager. Going from our house in the mountains there was an intersection with a sharp down hill right turn. Sometimes the car would stall with a loss of power steering. My wife was small and she int like it all.
Pointing to a URL would have been sufficient, e.g.
http://www.snopes.com/humor/jokes/autos.asp
http://www.snopes.com/humor/jokes/autos.asp
You don't get those kinds of productivity differentials in driving.
Moreover, access to the latest and greatest tech is a click away and costs nothing. If you were a professional driver and could click in your spare time to be in the driver's seat of a Ferrari or tank for free, of course you'd do it if you cared at all about your craft.
Finally, the hours and wages of computer scientists are obviously far better, so more demands in a CV are reasonable.
At best this is a sendup of the Craigslist naifs looking to build an FB killer at $15/hour...but I get the sense he's saying that employers shouldn't be so demanding.
Yet it is peers rather than employers who've set that standard, as there actually are a fairly substantial number of people who can do frontend and backend, full stack.
They're called hackers.