• PetDinosaurs@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Hah!

    No. The median engineer cannot, say, design anything to do with a tokamak fusion reactor. Even the ones that work at places that build tokamaks. At least the hard stuff, that’s why they’re in supporting roles.

    The people that do those types of things are very, very special.

    As for 10x’ers. This is a standard term. It’s used everywhere.

    Easy proof that they exist is that lots of people are taking on multiple “full time” jobs. Like 4-5.

    Those are at least 4x’ers. They’re just pretending to be 1x’ers for the salary bump.

    And of course, 10 x’ers don’t get 10 times the salary. Double would be pushing it.

    • Ghoti_@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      This is 100% true.

      I work as an electrical and hydraulic engineer and i consider myself above average.

      The people with the knowledge base above me are ridiculously intelligent and in a different playing field.

    • PeepinGoodArgs@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      The median engineer cannot, say, design anything to do with a tokamak fusion reactor.

      But, of all engineering problems, how many of them are associated with a tokamak fusion reactor?

      I’m not saying these people don’t exist or that they’re not highly valuable. I’m just saying their skills don’t need to be applied everywhere all the time, which leaves room for “regular” experts.

      • PetDinosaurs@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I’m deliberately avoiding identifying my industry, but this exists in every industry.

        I can be flippant and say “we’re not making a web shopping cart here” to my people, but the top engineers making Amazon’s shopping cart must deal with a lot of complicated problems.

        Do I even need to list things? Think of something that’s difficult. Nuclear bombs, medical devices, jet engines, skyscrapers, semiconductors, guided missiles. I could go on and on, but I’d still have to explain to you about the more mundane things like operations research.

        • agent_flounder@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          In case it helps to illustrate the point, those aren’t the most complicated things; those are areas in which a few very complicated, difficult problems exist. For example, semiconductors is a very massive field.

          Designing the next utilitarian op amp is not something everyone can do but it’s not that difficult of a problem, necessarily.

          Designing the next cutting edge CPU (for Intel or AMD or Apple or whatever) on the other hand is (I imagine) a handful of very difficult problems (most of which I have only the vaguest idea of) like optimizing pipeline and predictive execution or how to get to the next level chip design & fabrication process (which itself has a bunch of different issues, from what I gather).

          That’s where I would expect the 10x or whatever to work. At the cutting edge of engineering and science where the hardest problems are.