On the other hand tricky patches generally go into a git or some VCS, that you can point to and impress prospective employers with.
If there's any confusion regarding this it's the user's error.
Recruiters never ever look at patches/commits. They might read the bottom of a resume's first page.
And the article's point is that we should be designing systems that make it even harder for the users to make that error. It's the difference between
- a poorly-designed service that rewards people for contributing little real value to the world, and
- a well-designed service that rewards people proportional to the value they create
While it's true that the error is the user's, we stand to benefit from ensuring that other users don't make those errors in the first place.
On the other hand tricky patches generally go into a git or some VCS, that you can point to and impress prospective employers with.
If there's any confusion regarding this it's the user's error.