Question: Why does such good innovation often come from Johnny Geek living in his parent’s basement, while companies are willing to pay human resources millions of dollars to recruit said geek?
Answer: because Johnny Geek in his parent’s basement, and not with the company.
If he* actually had a day job, there would be two scenarios:
- It is a huge corporation, where his job entails tweaking, say, the arrows on Windows’ Programs menu. In short, he is paid to twiddle his thumbs and wait for shitty, unimportant projects that will never, ever change the course of humanity. It is very likely that he has a few hungry kids, so Johnny Geek kind of half-naps through the daily intellectual nightmare and watches his life go to waste.
- It is a small company with a cool concept. This is a lucky geek! Fortunately, the company has a perky business development department, which keeps securing financing from investors, who keep demanding new features. Uh-oh! Johnny Geek is told to churn out features on deadline, at the cost of things including, but not limited to: unit tests, necessary infrastructure overhauls, big-picture strategy, and good ole dreamin’ time.
In other words, the reason under-/un-employed techies are most likely to produce good technology is the same reason that the best music is produced in garages: it is a labor of love, created without pressure or deadlines, well-planned because there is no reason for it not to be.
*I know I am using the masculine pronoun. I’m following the unawkward conventions of English classics. In advance: buzz off!
One Comment
I’m glad you used the masculine pronoun. Of all the things you said in your article the feminine use of ambiguous pronouns worries me the most. Keep up the good work!