IMO a bad idea anyway - as a software dev, even a bad one, you can create more value for more people at the same time. As a plumber you're only fixing one thing for one person at a time so there's a hard limit on how valuable that is.

Tell that to literally any hi-rise building, conference hall, apt mains.

The arrogance of HN sometimes

Never ascribe to arrogance that which can be adequately explained by ignorance.

But believing you are better than someone else due to ignorance is pretty much the definition of arrogance.

Original statement was about the capabilities of the roles of software developers vs. plumbers, not the virtue of a person in the first role versus the second.

"Value". I mean yes you can if you are antirez but lets stop glorifying software developers as most of them dont provide any value to anyone except themselves. Plus fixing 30 kitchen sinks a month is a lot of value to me.

>as most of them dont provide any value to anyone except themselves

How do you explain software devs getting paid without providing any value?

C'mon, let's be real... most devs are working on features/products that will never see the light of day. Or they're restyling the company's "contact us" form for the thousandth time.

The market is not efficient. A software developer being paid $100k doesn't mean they're providing the world with $100k of value. it just means they convinced management/HR to pay them $100k for turning up 250/365 days.

I suggest checking out "bullshit jobs" by David Graeber :)

Sure, people don't always ship. Companies and investors pay to throw things at the wall and see what sticks. It doesn't all stick, but if they threw nothing, nothing would.

The individual may not provide 100k, but N developers probably provide (at least) 100Nk value. That or the market is very broken.

As an aside, you and the parent both say "most", which I would doubt but is difficult to prove either way.

> it just means they convinced management/HR to pay them $100k for turning up 250/365 days.

I mean isn't value based on what you can convince someone else to pay for the service/product. Are Mac's really valued at 10 grand or whatever, but rather simply what they've convinced someone to pay for that.

Also, isn't that the same for plumbers for example? Plumbers being paid around $150/hr (this is what is the going rate for a good plumber in Australia) are providing the world with $150/hr of value. It just means that they convinced the customer to pay them $150/hr for turning up to their house and taking a look at a leaky tap, one that could be fixed in about 5 mins.

And most plumbers are fixing clogs that a five year old with a rooter could fix thus providing no real value. See what I did there?

I wouldn’t put most devs in the category but the existence of “bullshit jobs” that provide little to no value isn’t controversial is it?

Edit: other reply beat me to it

That applies to plumbers as well. Which means we either come up with a comprehensive philosophy on what constitutes "value" or we go with the capitalistic approach of "what someone is willing to pay."