Slashdot Mirror


Quirky Engineers Gone the Way of the Dinosaur?

Milican writes "I think its time we ask our fellow Slashdotters, 'is there still room in a company for a quirky 'guru', or are projects so large now by necessity team-based development rules.' Read this article on Embedded.com and decide for yourself." I think this article didn't describe someone really 'quirky' though - it was someone who didn't really want to work.

3 of 319 comments (clear)

  1. Quirky "guru"? by Jerf · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Guru"? Nothing he did worked. How, exactly, did this person attain "guru" status? Sure, the guy trying to get rid of him claimed he had knowlege, but why assume he had skills? (Esp. for the people posting without reading the article.)

    There's an amusing stereotype at work in the posts here... we are automatically granting "guru" status because he is quirky. Sorry, I still look for skillz, and all the evidence suggests that was lacking. (Uncommented assembly may indicate guru status, but only when it works... when it doesn't work, it indicates an overestimation of personal skill. Not much middle ground here.)

    The fact is that there is every bit as much room for an exceptionally talented person to bend the rules as there ever has been. Our definition of exceptionally talented is rising, though. (Besides, eccentricity itself seems to be on the decline.)

  2. Re:That really does depend... by The+Cat · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Here's a little secret about the BOA project. The core development team is 6 people. Yep, that's right, *six* people to manage a project that allows millions of people to do their banking by phone. Those people are developers; there are three primary guys above them, one dev manager, and two project managers. (Well, one more guy, the VP over that division...)

    Six developers, four managers.

    Wow, no wonder it costs $12 to cash a check.

  3. Kuttner's Gallagher Stories (Robots Have No Tails) by Nova+Express · · Score: 5, Insightful
    One of the best science fictional examples of this are Henry Kuttner (as Lewis Padgett's) Gallagher stories (collected in Robots Have No Tails), about a guy who's a genius inventor, but only when he's completely drunk! He gets sloshed, builds something, passes out, and when he comes to, he had no idea what it was he built! Funny stuff, and highly politically incorrect today. Anyway,even Kuttner knew that Gallagher couldn't work in a corporate environment (even one extropalated from the 1940s!), so he has him as a consultant.

    Though somewhat dated now, there's a great section from one of the stories ("Ex Machina," 1948) which could have been written today: "The social trend always lags behind the technological one...moreover, an electronic duplicator could infringe not only on patents but on property right, and attroneys prepared volumious breifs on such issues as whether "rarity rights" are real property...the world, slightly punch-drunk on technology, was trying desperately to walk a straight line...It was all perfectly clear to the technicians, but they were much too impractical to be consulted; they were apt to remark "So my gadget unstabilizes property rights? Well-why have property rights then?"

    Not bad for half a century before Napster...

    --
    Lawrence Person (lawrencepersonh@gmailh.com (remove all "h"s to mail)

    http://www.lawrenceperson.com/