I completely agree, unless you are doing something unique, low level where ie latency is the king (which most of us don't), frameworks and libraries shine for 99% of the cases.
Some brilliant folks are just bored by usual rather generic work, and their idea of 'fun' is to keep reinventing the wheel that specifically fits current problem. Actual benefits to business be damned, intellectual fun is more important. Once those folks leave (and they always leave eventually), its mayhem for the remainder of the team/company.
For me, this kind of 'autistic' brilliance is overall just professional incompetency that shows over long time period and I avoid hiring such folks. One can babysit them and steer them but its rarely worth it within usual teams.
> Some brilliant folks are just bored by usual rather generic work, and their idea of 'fun' is to keep reinventing the wheel that specifically fits current problem. Actual benefits to business be damned, intellectual fun is more important. Once those folks leave (and they always leave eventually), its mayhem for the remainder of the team/company.
I could write a dissertation on this statement alone. But let's use two examples. Python and Node. Both are very "never do anything yourself" languages. Lots of libraries, even more frameworks. What's the result?
1. CVEs all over that place that effect nearly anything people touch.
2. Library creep. Pulling in one library or framework pulls in the entire planet.
3. Libraries and frameworks exist for absolute trivia. Node is famous for this, including stupid packages that literally just color text (and not in a meaningful way like a logger).
So in exchange for avoiding your alleged "autistic brilliance" you increase your attack surface 10 fold. I use libraries all the time, I am absolutely sure to limit their scope as much as possible. I won't use libraries for trivia, and I evaluate frameworks extremely carefully. It's kind of funny how often your opinion is parroted in startup forums but for some reason I keep making more money every year despite every signal pointing to me somehow being in the class of engineer that are, according to you, better off without a job.
Companies are run by idiots. The hubris you show is the same hubris a VP of engineering shows having last programmed 10 years ago. It shows a complete lack of nuance and understanding of the engineer.
Some brilliant folks are just bored by usual rather generic work, and their idea of 'fun' is to keep reinventing the wheel that specifically fits current problem. Actual benefits to business be damned, intellectual fun is more important. Once those folks leave (and they always leave eventually), its mayhem for the remainder of the team/company.
For me, this kind of 'autistic' brilliance is overall just professional incompetency that shows over long time period and I avoid hiring such folks. One can babysit them and steer them but its rarely worth it within usual teams.