This is unbelievably condescending.

I'll follow up on your false analogy to try to get you to your mistake: even Monet had to learn before he became Monet! Even Monet had to fight before he became Monet. He even got rejected and created an art salon because he and his peers were misunderstood by art intelligentsia.

So by rejecting engineers that you deem not worthy of being artists, you're just putting yourself in the position of the bourgeoisie that rejected Monet in the first place.

You're ignoring potential for talent. And really am I glad you're doing that because I then get to train and hire them.

Actually, you want a team of painters who work well together.

Hiring only Monets doesn't scale. Could the dude have even worked with himself?

https://www.mysanantonio.com/entertainment/arts-culture/book...

Truth, though I would argue very few areas in CS still need that caliber of dev - surely most (middling) shops would prefer the paint-by-numbers dev for most roles as it shows they're likely reliable and able to work within the team's existing framework than a maverick who may run circles around the rest (in both good and bad ways).

Ofc you need both, would be interested to see how a full 10x team would operate with no 'grunts' there to slog through all the tedious parts of the SWE process.

You don't need a team of people as skilled as Monet to make a working software product. Incredibly condescending. And good lucking ONLY hiring absolute masters for your engineering team as you scale beyond like, one or two hires. How many people in the world do you even think are that skilled?

Plus people require and deserve investment. It's okay to take in people who need development and turn them into solid engineers.