Reminds me of artists, how do artists stand out when photography can do better capture of reality (and easier, and cheaper, etc.) than artists can. Artists had to re-invent (or re-discovered, re-focused, etc.) themselves in all kinds of ways like cubism, impressionism, surrealism, etc.
In the end, the criteria remains the same. The engineers that creates products other people would pay for. The engineers that can convince executives to pay them or let them do this and that freely. The engineers that are thought leaders and have wide audiences.
Anyway, at the micro level, I think "How to How" is still important. I believe in developers that can talk about their workflow in detail, how it evolved over time, etc. Really good engineers invest in the workflows of themselves and others. That's my benchmark before and still is even now.
Reminds me of artists, how do artists stand out when photography can do better capture of reality (and easier, and cheaper, etc.) than artists can. Artists had to re-invent (or re-discovered, re-focused, etc.) themselves in all kinds of ways like cubism, impressionism, surrealism, etc.
Would coding in [brainfuck](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brainfuck) be the marker of good engineers?
In the end, the criteria remains the same. The engineers that creates products other people would pay for. The engineers that can convince executives to pay them or let them do this and that freely. The engineers that are thought leaders and have wide audiences.
Anyway, at the micro level, I think "How to How" is still important. I believe in developers that can talk about their workflow in detail, how it evolved over time, etc. Really good engineers invest in the workflows of themselves and others. That's my benchmark before and still is even now.