pull down to refresh

There has recently been a lot of talk about 10x engineers. It's partly an observation of how popular products and big corporations are often build in short breakthrough moments and a lot of time and people with slow and incremental progress.
I have also no doubt that there is a retrospect-justification to it to justify the insane salaries of very few engineers at faang companies.
Our boi sama picked up a subtone of these tweets that consists of simple envy. I find that incredibly funny because the exsistence of 100x engineers meaning a few dozen geniuses on earth each generation is faaaar less controversial and more obvious than calling the bulk of San Fransisco senior engineers "10x".
What is your opinion on this? Do 10x engineers exist? Are they 10x better than average coders? Are there 100x engineers that deserve having a myth and vast amounts of money thrown at them?
One of my personal opinions on this is:
  • No matter if they exist, this debate is tiring because most teams would rather need a 5th Junior person doing quantitative stuff
  • This debate underminds how insane the progress of two good engineers can be if they have the freedom to bounce ideas between them.
  • And this "10x" debate seems to overrate coders that are genuinely just good slightly over average but again worse than hiring two people.
  • Founders who can't code or recruiters have no effing idea who "10x" engineers really are. They're wasting money on the wrong people because of this debate
reply