I think it strikes home a little more because it’s easier to generalize my own experiences than anyone else’s. I can remember improving over time, and so it takes less of a leap of the imagination to see my future self being better than my present self. It’s harder to recognize that other people are already better than me.

What makes a good developer? Is it the ability to quickly conceptualize solutions to problems? Having an encyclopedic knowledge of a subject? Is it being able to quickly and correctly answer any question someone “tests” you with? I don’t dig into myself too much if I had to check the PHP or MDN docs for a hazily-remembered method name if my solution was on point, but I think some folks would.

When is the point someone can rightly and confidently say, “I’m worth $x” and understand how x maps to their own skill level? Then there’s the geographic issue of cost of living, where $50k may be comfy in some places, but in NYC it’d be mandatory to start thinking about having several roommates. I’ve had an employer think me smug for asking for what I consider a decent living wage, and it’s impossible for me to tell whether I’m actually being smug or they’re just low-balling me. Being a newbie is tougher than people give us credit for.

(Also, I third the Dunning-Kruger Effect mention. I see that shit all the time in my day job.)

I like this article http://successfulsoftware.net/tag/dunning-kruger/. According to the chart in it, the worst and the best in some skill are going to rate themselves quite the same, with the worst ones rating themselves higher then the second best. Talk about the standard employer’s question “rate your skills on the scale of 10″. It totally defeats the purpose.

Basically, confidence in one’s abilities is inversely proportional to actual understanding of the content.

I’d love to see a breakdown of developers 10 or 15 years into their careers. What percentage are still developers? How many of them are using the same platform that they started out with? I think what we’ll find is that the number of developers who have been around a good while and are still staying on the cutting edge of the field is very small, and very much in demand. So there are a huge number of projects out there that don’t have any real senior leadership. The senior people are either off hacking on mature projects or they’re working at places like Google or Amazon.

What’s left is in Lord of the Flies territory.

What I don’t know because I wasn’t involved in the web a decade ago, is how the crowd of innovators today differs from the crowds that spawned the mega CMSs, or the browsers, or the GUI operating systems, or the CLIs, that we all consider de facto today.

Reputation, prior work and demonstration of skill should inform the responsibilities that one is given. I know that when someone says they’re a 9 out of 10 with CSS, they’re going to get an interviewing grilling that has in one instance caused tears (I felt really bad about that though!). Tell me you’re a 9 out of 10 with JavaScript and I’m going to ask you to teach me something during the interview!