TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

How to Make Other Developers Hate to Work with You

272 pointsby turingbookabout 6 years ago

34 comments

vharuckabout 6 years ago
I thunk there&#x27;s a second &quot;flavor&quot; of arrogance, where a person believes they&#x27;re the smartest, but not most knowledgeable, in the room. These people will openly admit they can improve and seek training, partly because they believe they&#x27;re capable of anything. They don&#x27;t think they&#x27;re at the top of the mountain, just that their mountain has no peak.<p>The real problem is they believe &quot;lazy&quot; coworkers will eventually be below them in every subject. They may seek out colleagues&#x27; advice some times, but likely will never return because they &quot;get it&quot; now.&quot;<p>They&#x27;ll act like a &quot;jack and master of all trades.&quot; This can be nice in small teams, but usually leads to components nobody (not even the arrogant one) can understand let alone maintain. So experts need to be brought in, anyway.<p>These people let the quick ascent of &quot;Mount Ignorance&quot; multiple subjects get to their head. No such thing as a Renaissance man anymore.<p>Sadly, I&#x27;m that flavor of arrogance.
评论 #19226808 未加载
评论 #19226539 未加载
评论 #19226614 未加载
评论 #19227408 未加载
评论 #19227092 未加载
评论 #19226620 未加载
评论 #19228223 未加载
评论 #19228969 未加载
评论 #19227697 未加载
评论 #19228211 未加载
评论 #19227287 未加载
评论 #19226900 未加载
评论 #19226631 未加载
评论 #19226917 未加载
chooseanameabout 6 years ago
9. Refuse to do any maintenance and only work on new projects.<p>10. Hide your actual productivity. IE: get done with your coding tasks in half the time, leaving other devs have to fix all the bugs that QA kick back. (This is probably a managerial issue, actually, but perpetuated by devs who do # 9.)
评论 #19226366 未加载
评论 #19228693 未加载
评论 #19227335 未加载
expertentippabout 6 years ago
Sorry, but real life situation is infinitely more complicated.<p>Crybullies, manipulative people, people driven by greed to have power over others, hazing the new team member for whatever reason. Some are much more likely and zealous to report colleagues to the supervisors, some less. Some are more likely to be listened by the supervisors, some less.<p>In unlucky circumstances, couple of rounds of conversations with managers and suddenly <i>you</i> are the asshole nobody wants to work with.
Dzugaruabout 6 years ago
&gt; Developers can’t easily go back to where they were right<p>&gt; before an interruption. They need to get into the mindset<p>&gt; for development and then slowly trace back to where they<p>&gt; left off. And every fellow developer knows that.<p>I used to think like that too, but after 10 years programming in many environments, now I&#x27;m inclined to disagree. If I cannot refocus immediately after interruption - I know I&#x27;m doing something wrong. Maybe the thing is too complex and must be cut down to smaller pieces, maybe I didn&#x27;t keep enough notes or thinking through - anyhow nowadays I cannot work without a clear understanding of what simple piece of what complex piece I&#x27;m doing and where I&#x27;ve written down the other pieces I should do next.
评论 #19228199 未加载
评论 #19228091 未加载
评论 #19228176 未加载
评论 #19227381 未加载
评论 #19229259 未加载
评论 #19228033 未加载
评论 #19228563 未加载
scandoxabout 6 years ago
Here&#x27;s a profile of a developer:<p>- Easy going and pleasant.<p>- Really interested in programming and tech in general<p>- Talks intelligently about the problem at hand. Asks all the right questions. Agrees a plan of action in collaboration with colleagues.<p>- Creates systems that definitely appear to work<p>- Code looks pretty sane. Structure is right. Style seems good.<p>- Always very responsive to problems. Jumps straight on them.<p>- Every problem fixed another one seems to pop up.<p>- Eventually you dig into the code and problem space in detail and you find that in a very subtle, even complex way the whole thing is completely wrong, the problem space misunderstood and everything patched over with little fixes to get things working for a particular case.<p>In the end no system created by the person is useable without major remediation by another developer.<p>Anyone experienced this?
评论 #19228259 未加载
评论 #19228929 未加载
评论 #19230407 未加载
评论 #19227517 未加载
评论 #19227874 未加载
评论 #19230430 未加载
评论 #19227426 未加载
asabjornabout 6 years ago
&gt; A team with a bad developer is way better off short one developer than it is with a bad element.<p>How do you know that you just didn&#x27;t communicate your issues well to the person? Is there a way to help them, you and your relationship improve so that you can be a stronger team?<p>We all have blindspots and weaknesses, and weaknesses that fit together like puzzle-pieces tend to find each other until you resolve them.<p>The half-moon is only an illusion, the whole moon is still there. You just don&#x27;t see it, and you need the whole.
评论 #19227464 未加载
giancarlostoroabout 6 years ago
I think #1 and #6 go hand in hand, and usually results in #2. If you disregard your team, and you&#x27;re arrogant, your code will likely be sloppy as hell. In my opinion that makes you the worst member of the team.<p>I spoke with a coworker about this and we agreed that you just need to be humble as a software developer: we all are going to screw up, we don&#x27;t all know all the answers, and we don&#x27;t know why others in our teams say &#x2F; know specific things, but we should not take their advise lightly it might of been a painful lesson for them to begin with!
评论 #19226265 未加载
kobollabout 6 years ago
Holy crap, is<p>&gt;gives cryptic names for variables, or at best not self-explanatory<p>sure a big one. It&#x27;s part of a category of small decisions that dramatically increase cognitive load when accumulated. Along with it:<p>&gt;Passing many arguments into functions with names that have no relevance to their role inside the function, so you constantly have to look up which argument maps to which function param<p>&gt;Needlessly reorganizing data structures or renaming variables so that it becomes more difficult to reason about the flow of data<p>Naming things isn&#x27;t just the hardest problem in programming, it&#x27;s also the quickest way to piss off your peers if you&#x27;re lazy about it.
评论 #19227543 未加载
评论 #19227506 未加载
评论 #19230182 未加载
评论 #19227867 未加载
braythwaytabout 6 years ago
There&#x27;s not a single thing in there that I don&#x27;t recognize in myself at one time or another.<p>I sometimes feel like I don&#x27;t see anti-patterns as I go through my career, I fall over them and sprawl on the floor.
评论 #19226295 未加载
评论 #19227468 未加载
评论 #19227499 未加载
ourmandaveabout 6 years ago
As a solo developer who does all these, I have a lot of self-loathing.
评论 #19226488 未加载
评论 #19226497 未加载
finaliterationabout 6 years ago
I’ll add another one: Nitpicking constantly.<p>I’ve worked with people who will fight and argue over every. Single. Detail. It drives me insane and usually makes me quit faster than anything else when I encounter those people.
评论 #19228243 未加载
评论 #19228789 未加载
stcredzeroabout 6 years ago
How everyone can be right, but everyone gets annoyed anyways.<p>Cast:<p>Developer A, a younger developer who is recognized company-wide as an expert in the latest features of blb++.<p>Developer B, an older developer who maintains widely used legacy code in blb++ involved in about 80% of a billion dollar multinational&#x27;s profits.<p>Dev A: Your group should change the coding style in this application to the new standard.<p>Dev B: Sure. But since we don&#x27;t have good Unit Test coverage in this area, we shouldn&#x27;t just go in and do it by hand. I need to guarantee correctness. I&#x27;ve done a change this big before using a syntax driven automated code rewrite tool, and one can guarantee correctness if the code structure allows it. If you know of such a tool for blb++, you can help me out and we can do it.<p>(Background for the reader: No such tool exists for blb++ which can guarantee correctness. Such tools do exist for other languages in Dev B&#x27;s work experience.)<p>Later on, Dev A is grousing about how Dev B is just coming up with esoteric excuses to do nothing. She&#x27;s kind of put off. Dev B is put off, because he&#x27;s kind of been accused of making stuff up, even though he&#x27;s talking from a particularly interesting and valuable part of his work experience.<p>Dev A is correct, in that the new coding style is better, more efficient, and would even prevent mistakes going forwards. Dev B is correct, in that he really needs to guarantee correctness, especially if he&#x27;s going to make a change that big which has no visible benefit to stakeholders. What&#x27;s the takeaway?
评论 #19228221 未加载
评论 #19228829 未加载
评论 #19228489 未加载
评论 #19228690 未加载
评论 #19228215 未加载
评论 #19230526 未加载
arandr0xabout 6 years ago
In my experience people provide excuses because they&#x27;re being addressed by management in a way that is unnecessarily negative and&#x2F;or management is wanting to find &quot;guilty people&quot; and not work out which is the best person for the job of fixing things.<p>That the article is clearly refusing to even mention this casts a big shadow over the rest of its conclusions. Some of the other things are the result of personality (like taking credit or sloppiness) but making excuses is 100% context and a defensive coping strategy literally every time I have seen or done it.
评论 #19227034 未加载
fromthestartabout 6 years ago
&gt;Most developers are enthusiastic people, but sometimes you may have the chance (or misfortune) to work with a negative one. Negativity is infectious<p>Western society has a weird optimism bias. I think it goes hand in hand with extroversion bias, and it keeps many people from being genuine.<p>&gt;those developers are clearly at the top of Mount Stupid<p>Frankly, that&#x27;s insulting. Being a negative or critical person does not make one stupid, on the contrary, I would argue that the skepticism that comes with negativity is an asset for engineering. This advice is carte blanche to dismiss criticism.
评论 #19227916 未加载
评论 #19230491 未加载
kakarotabout 6 years ago
I thought I would make an addendum:<p>&gt; We all know at least one developer who ... will always insist on following “best practices” without understanding why those practices are considered “best” (there is no such thing as best practices that adapt to every team)<p>For any developers out there recently starting on your path, I cannot stress the importance of taking the time to seek out best practices for new skills and technologies you pick up.<p>Find all the &quot;best practices&quot; you can, then ignore some of them for a while with some pilot code, then try to follow a combination of the ones that make most sense to you. Compare the two modules for legibility, clarity, maintainability and conciseness.<p>If, however, your team already has an entrenched way of doing things, don&#x27;t be that jerk who comes to the party blasting their own music. Follow the existing style guides to a T and only offer advice for improvement after you&#x27;ve spent some time working with them.<p>Even if you immediately recognize a glaring problem in the way things are done, no one is going to take you seriously and you&#x27;ll just come across as arrogant unless you already have rapport as a perceptive and helpful team member.<p>Take time to understand the culture around you, but don&#x27;t, as this author suggests, ignore the tried and true devices of other cultures.
评论 #19230317 未加载
daveFNbuckabout 6 years ago
It&#x27;s very weird to describe arrogance as a problem only for people near the bottom in terms of ability. Arrogance is an issue at all skill levels.
评论 #19227907 未加载
rojobuffaloabout 6 years ago
I was just imagining the opposites of these and remembering some of my favorite people I ever worked with. I&#x27;ve only ever worked with 2 developers who I didn&#x27;t like, and they fit this list almost perfectly.<p>Be humble, be kind.
harlanjiabout 6 years ago
Individuals often have little control over these things, and they are indicative of deeper cultural incentives. Without transgressing some, nothing will get done in many orgs. I see it a lot in big money VC backed startups, much less so in bootstrapped businesses. It’s important to be non-judgmental of people doing these things and simply leave or master Machiavellian moves to clear a path to promotion as other players are, eg. via optics or rallying support to oust “toxic” rivals for the good of the team.
评论 #19226891 未加载
评论 #19226300 未加载
neokantianabout 6 years ago
<i>As mentioned above, either the code works or it doesn’t … but it needs to work in combination with all the code being added to the codebase by your teammates.</i><p>That is Linus&#x27; job (or one of his trusted lieutenants). Kernel contributors generally do not interact with each other directly. There are simply too many kernel contributors to hold all kinds of &quot;team meetings&quot;. The problems that the article mentions, exist mostly in a corporate environment. Virtual, distributed teams generally do not have these problems.<p><i>Software engineering is probably the most collaborative work in today’s world.</i><p>Yes, but successful software, such as the linux kernel, is not developed in the way he believes it is. What corporate IT typically does, is certainly not a reference.<p><i>A manager who doesn’t understand this is a manager who doesn’t understand software engineering.</i><p>A manager who does not read, evaluate, and merge pull requests, is not a manager; and does indeed not understand software engineering. The article complains about the side effects of one particular, rather outdated approach to software engineering. You will, for example, not hear the PostgreSQL or the Debian team complain about that kind of issues.
评论 #19226537 未加载
CodeSheikhabout 6 years ago
From my experience at various companies, &quot;technical managers&quot; fit well into most of these categories. Because actively coding and managing a team of multiple developers can bring most of these issues out of you. Example: &quot;getting away with your architectural decisions because you are presenting your ideas with a managerial authority and ignoring better solutions presented by other senior developers.&quot;
say-vagnesabout 6 years ago
Good article. However, I&#x27;d like to talk about documentation and comments, as they were mentioned a lot.<p>I think the industry should rely on them less. The trouble is, nobody updates every comment, and documentation is even more out of date. They cannot be automatically verified either.<p>Getting worked up about it is just going to give you stress. Further, it is terribly subjective. Instead, advocate for the other good practices - variable names, clear separation of concerns, single responsibility, functional purity, etc.<p>I have this inkling, actually, that the more comments there are in a function, the worse it is. Even high level overview comments, like some outlining an algorithm, could instead be high-level code, composing the various pieces together.<p>It is very rare that a concept is actually nuanced in code. Instead, it is usually the implementation - and you can improve it.<p>That said, it&#x27;s a ton of work, and we have to ship a product at the end of the day.<p>So here we are again, discussing tradeoffs in tech, and I think in these cases a comment block is an OK compromise. Just be cognizant that it <i>IS</i> a compromise.
meukabout 6 years ago
Common misconception, but that graph does <i>not</i> explain the Dunning-Kruger effect. It&#x27;s actually more like a linear curve, it&#x27;s just a little flatter than the graph of y = x.<p>The Dunning-Kruger effect is that the best people underestimate their relative abilities, and the worst overestimate. So, the worst 10% may estimate they are about average, while the top 10% might estimate they are in the top 20%. These are more realistic figures than the graph used in this article.
评论 #19226700 未加载
mnm1about 6 years ago
Love the article except for the part that encourages developers to rat on other developers. No. Unless another developer is so bad they are putting your job in jeopardy, let them be. It&#x27;s the manager&#x27;s job to sort that out and do something about it.<p>Throwing other developers under the bus when ones own job security is not threatened should be the number one thing on this list of asshole things a developer can do by far. By very, very, very far.
john-radioabout 6 years ago
This writer stole &quot;Mount Stupid&quot; from Zach Weinersmith (Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal) without crediting him! <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.smbc-comics.com&#x2F;?id=2475" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.smbc-comics.com&#x2F;?id=2475</a>
crdrostabout 6 years ago
Example of the arrogance mentioned in the first point: I have met folks who have seriously argued to me that their code contained no technical debt because &quot;We wrote it right the first time.&quot; The code at the time was something in the range of 50,000 lines (so assuming 30 lines of code per page, 500 pages per textbook, you&#x27;d have to read ~3 textbooks on the subject of what their code does to understand it) and contained no test suite... and maybe 5% of the code was comments.<p>Sloppiness seems to come with enough examples... but I must say that it&#x27;s not really a direct problem <i>unless</i> you are in a supervisory role and <i>nevertheless</i> insist on modifying the codebase, as that makes it significantly harder to correct you on your sloppiness.<p>Disrespect of others&#x27; time is being directly connected to meetings here -- I sympathize but I do think that the bigger issue is that &quot;deep work&quot; is best done in ~2-hour uninterrupted batches, and so a company culture which encourages actively scheduling those on shared calendars so that we can have &quot;open spaces&quot; for meetings during other parts of the day, would help a lot. Especially, I am growing more confident that meetings which exist should revolve around some decision to be made that needs input from a bunch of people -- in other words, every meeting is a negotiation and if it&#x27;s just a &quot;progress update&quot; or a &quot;question and answer&quot; session it should be moved to an asynchronous medium like Slack or (to a lesser extent) email. If you insist on daily standups at least have the courtesy to schedule them in the afternoon so that when I come in off of my morning commute having thought, &quot;I am going to do X, then Y, then Z&quot; I am not burdened by &quot;I have only 1 hour to work on X before I have to drop everything for the daily standup...&quot;<p>I am probably more guilty of the constant negativity, I think a piece of wisdom from Seth Freeman is helpful here: that one wants to separate problems from people and be hard on problems, soft on people. You can be constantly be negative towards a problem and this will be tolerable if you are consistently cheerful towards the people who might have other needs with which they pursue those ends. &quot;I am really worried that without a proper auth strategy we may get hacked, I know that you all strongly value being able to go forward without wasting time on such a frustratingly difficult problem, I fully understand that, but there has got to be some way that we can get a proper auth strategy which doesn&#x27;t bog us down so that we&#x27;re also not trivially hackable&quot; is a very negative position but it somehow doesn&#x27;t carry the same &quot;drag&quot; as &quot;you&#x27;re so stupid, trying to implement this insecure thing, you&#x27;re going to be the reason we get hacked.&quot;<p>Greediness is a hard thing, definitely, but I would observe that all of the examples seem to have to do with private communication channels, and I wonder whether that&#x27;s endemic to the situation. I also wonder how it subdivides with a manager taking credit for the successes of their team -- in some cases this respect is due and in some cases you feel like &quot;we spent more time evading my boss than being led by them!&quot;...<p>I think the weakest part of the article was &quot;disregard for the team,&quot; I feel like that&#x27;s just a catchall for &quot;doing anything that was annoying to me personally&quot; and it&#x27;s like &quot;well yeah but that&#x27;s not helpful.&quot; I think any friction can be couched as &quot;disregarding the team&quot; whereas true disregard has something to do with &quot;you went off and made your own decisions and never told any of the rest of us about it and we could have told you that they were not wise decisions because of needs that you would not have been expected to anticipate&quot; -- but the sin there is really just falling out of step with the community and thinking &quot;I can sail this ship entirely on my own!&quot; and I think it&#x27;s less disregard-for than lack-of-community-with. Like it&#x27;s great to have ownership of some problem, but keep in constant conversation as well.<p>Lack-of-focus is I guess an irritant but I&#x27;ve never worked with someone where it was so bad as to &quot;hate to work with you&quot;... I think some of that is a lack of leadership-focus, if you have an aggressive timeline to deliver an aggressively minimal product then there is very little room to dither? But that may just be that I have not worked on a hard enough problem where one needs to upfront a serious enough amount of investment to force such dithering.<p>I was also frustrated to see &quot;lack of accountability&quot; defined as &quot;more focused on making excuses than solving problems&quot; because to my mind those are two separate issues, the &quot;I am never to blame because I will point the finger at someone else!&quot; is toxic, but it doesn&#x27;t become less toxic if someone is like &quot;yeah I mean I was just doing my best with the API results that Phil was giving me, Phil really screwed us over with this one, let&#x27;s solve the problem by creating an API v2 that doesn&#x27;t have his shitty endpoint in it, instead the endpoint will work like this, and then I can write code that&#x27;s actually correct.&quot; That revolves around a solution while still having the attendant point-the-finger-and-blame attitude and I don&#x27;t think that the solution-focus really removes the awfulness of the negativity.<p>Kind of my take aways are:<p>1. Keep learning and growing, shun practices which set you up as someone who knows everything and has nowhere to grow.<p>2. Keep honest with yourself about what&#x27;s really going on, you can massage the description to others but you should be clear on &#x27;we are not meeting this deadline because our contractor is two weeks late delivering this component and we cannot start building this next part without it&#x27; -- use that clarity to try to creatively evade those restrictions in the future, &#x27;can we agree on a black-box specification so that you are not blocking my peer developers from working? Like, here&#x27;s an example JSON file or two that your API will return in response to this query?&quot; -- Do not lie to yourself in cases of &quot;I am screwing this up&quot; or &quot;I am overburdened&quot; or whatever, as those lies breed bigger lies later, that developer who is like &quot;It will be done this week!&quot; for weeks on end.<p>3. Keep compassion in your heart for everyone else. I am trying to separate that empathy as much as possible from these other criteria and just dump it in one. Do not be aggressive or negative or so with others, they are not the problem, they are not to be recipients of blame... they are fellow human beings who need to also grow and be respected just like you do. Don&#x27;t say anything which you would not want someone to hear if you said it to their face, for example.<p>4. This was not really discussed explicitly in this article, but don&#x27;t settle for mediocrity. Go out on a limb, take a risk, try to do things that might fail. I think one of the things that can really make me hate to work with you is that you would rather copy-paste some convoluted solution that worked once to a problem with considerable limitations, rather than that you&#x27;re really trying new things, refactoring, simplifying. One thing I perversely love to see in source code is a brute-force approach. Just an &quot;I don&#x27;t know what the right way is to solve this but there are only 8! different ways this can happen so I&#x27;m just going to iterate through the 40,320 of them and see which one is best, we can improve this with some heuristics later.&quot; But it has to be an interesting problem of &quot;which of these things is going to be most effective for our users?&quot; for me to have that respect. You stuck your neck out and did something that other people would have just shrugged and said &quot;that sounds impossible, let&#x27;s move on&quot; and I love that spirit.<p>5. And finally there is some sort of pride&#x2F;humility thing going on, don&#x27;t think that you are the center of the universe and that every other developer exists to make you effective, but rather give up your ego in service of the art that you are creating. If you understand this code as a vehicle for yourself to be validated then I will probably not like working with you, if you understand this code as a joint effort of love and service, I will probably call you my brother or sister.
jd75about 6 years ago
People love to work with me, but managers love all of those flaws.
评论 #19226801 未加载
blindwatchmakerabout 6 years ago
Re: documenting code, I&#x27;ve gotten a lot of conflicting advice over the years, with some people insisting code should be documenting, and others insisting on docstrings.
评论 #19228160 未加载
cde-vabout 6 years ago
This sounds more like how to make anyone hate to work with you.
qrbLPHiKpiuxabout 6 years ago
I&#x27;m in healthcare and this translates wonderfully into my field. Especially with being one staff short than have all, and one be negative.
deckar01about 6 years ago
<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;web.archive.org&#x2F;web&#x2F;20190222151703&#x2F;https:&#x2F;&#x2F;anaxi.com&#x2F;blog&#x2F;2019&#x2F;02&#x2F;20&#x2F;how-to-make-other-developers-hate-to-work-with-you&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;web.archive.org&#x2F;web&#x2F;20190222151703&#x2F;https:&#x2F;&#x2F;anaxi.com...</a><p>Edit: The domain is unreachable for me, I assumed it was for others also. It is still unreachable for me for some reason.
darkstar999about 6 years ago
Ironically this domain is blocked at work for being a &quot;spam url&quot;.
sonnyblarneyabout 6 years ago
&#x27;Arrogance&#x27; is more often than not mostly a matter of perception. Truly arrogant people can seem nice - so we generally don&#x27;t want to ascribe negative qualities like &#x27;arrogant&#x27; to them.<p>&#x27;Real arrogance&#x27;, and even greed, backstabbing - those can also done by people who seem to be well liked.<p>&#x27;Perceptive arrogance&#x27; I think is mostly a matter of posture, demeanour and communication. If you smile, let other people talk, have an easygoing manner, and are agreeable, you will not be perceived as &#x27;arrogant&#x27; even though you may have all of the qualities of a truly arrogant person.<p>I don&#x27;t think &#x27;perceived arrogance&#x27; has anything to do with actually humility or gauge of one&#x27;s own abilities, or of one&#x27;s sense of self importance in the group.<p>If you&#x27;re terse, blunt, dour or gregarious ... it can be perceived as arrogant.<p>&#x27;Real arrogance&#x27; i.e. the notion that one&#x27;s thoughts and ideals matter more than others etc. I think is not even correlated with posture and communication style.<p>The most successful people in the corporate world are pure political players, and have never cared about outcomes, doing a good job - anything. All they care about is perception and their careers. But they are actually nice enough, generally charismatic.<p>Actually caring caring about a product can simply cause contention, and possibly give the perception of arrogance.<p>I prefer to consider arrogance in terms of measured behaviours, outcomes etc.. Glib political climbers to me are arrogant. Anyone actually trying to &#x27;do a good job&#x27; and stepping on toes is just a bad communicator.
stephsmithioabout 6 years ago
A lot of good nuggets in here. Dunning-Kruger and Mt. Stupid is one, but I especially like this quote &quot;meetings are just scheduled interruptions&quot;.
zzzcpanabout 6 years ago
Referencing Dunning-Kruger effect in any topic on software engineering is very arrogant and pretentious on itself. This says more about the author, than other people&#x27;s stupidity. The article is just bad.
评论 #19226936 未加载
评论 #19227605 未加载