I have to disagree with quite a few of the negative indicators mentioned here.
Programming is only a day job
There's nothing wrong with programming being a day job. People can have different hobbies outside of work and still be great at what they do. This indicator only strengthens the stigma that all developers should be geeks who live and breathe code, and nothing else.
Doesn't seem too smart
This is just common sense. You always try to hire adequate and smart people, more so in a field like software development where the primary goal is to solve problems.
Started programming at university
This is a big no from me. I started programming the summer before I started college and I believe to be an above average developer. There are tons of people around me who have started programming at college and they are also great at their jobs. Also, the reason why an individual does not learn programming before college can be literally anything. Not being guided the right way, not having access to enough resources, etc.
This list is not to determine if a developer is just good, it's to determine if they are rockstar level good, and IMO does more harm than good to anyone who reads it. I'm certain there will be developers who will feel discouraged after reading this list and feel inadequate, even though they are good developers and doing their best.
I would love to read the original Slashdot article if you have the link to it.
Peter is the former President of the New Zealand Open Source Society. He is currently working on Business Workflow Automation, and is the core maintainer for Gravity Workflow a GPL workflow engine.
These came from a certain point in time, so I think things have changed, and so you might be right.
When I was younger I had lots of spare time to code, as I didn't have much of a life outside coding. As I've aged I've got involved with outside communities and coding in my spare time is not as attractive given my other priorities.
Still, we want people passionate about software.
Obviously we want 'smart' people, but my experience has grown i've found smartness is difficult to judge. Someone might appear bright and intelligent yet not have the capability. Quiet people who have difficulty face to face can shine.
The point about University isn't that people who go there are not smart, just that those really passionate about technology would have been involved prior to University.
The common thread here is passion; picking people who care. There are capable, intelligent people around who just don't care, and who treat development as just a job. They may actually be perfectly adequate in a functional sense, but this wasn't about finding adequate.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
I have to disagree with quite a few of the negative indicators mentioned here.
There's nothing wrong with programming being a day job. People can have different hobbies outside of work and still be great at what they do. This indicator only strengthens the stigma that all developers should be geeks who live and breathe code, and nothing else.
This is just common sense. You always try to hire adequate and smart people, more so in a field like software development where the primary goal is to solve problems.
This is a big no from me. I started programming the summer before I started college and I believe to be an above average developer. There are tons of people around me who have started programming at college and they are also great at their jobs. Also, the reason why an individual does not learn programming before college can be literally anything. Not being guided the right way, not having access to enough resources, etc.
This list is not to determine if a developer is just good, it's to determine if they are rockstar level good, and IMO does more harm than good to anyone who reads it. I'm certain there will be developers who will feel discouraged after reading this list and feel inadequate, even though they are good developers and doing their best.
I would love to read the original Slashdot article if you have the link to it.
These came from a certain point in time, so I think things have changed, and so you might be right.
When I was younger I had lots of spare time to code, as I didn't have much of a life outside coding. As I've aged I've got involved with outside communities and coding in my spare time is not as attractive given my other priorities.
Still, we want people passionate about software.
Obviously we want 'smart' people, but my experience has grown i've found smartness is difficult to judge. Someone might appear bright and intelligent yet not have the capability. Quiet people who have difficulty face to face can shine.
The point about University isn't that people who go there are not smart, just that those really passionate about technology would have been involved prior to University.
The common thread here is passion; picking people who care. There are capable, intelligent people around who just don't care, and who treat development as just a job. They may actually be perfectly adequate in a functional sense, but this wasn't about finding adequate.