I like the aspiration to grow engineers — it’s a laudable, and worthy, goal.
But I also feel there is a little bit of a pandora’s box here.
The model you’re creating here is more structured ‘gig economy’ path for software dev. Sure, you’ve got things like UpWork, and other freelance products, but the purchasers (e.g., business) are effectively taking a risky bet on the work which can tamper commitment to purchasing work that way.
But with ‘no merge, no fee’ could create a very strange dynamic where companies will opportunistically throw work over the wall and create bounty-like dynamics. I don’t know if this is particularly bad for the purchaser, but for the seller that could lead to some challenges overtime (race to the bottom etc)
But I also feel there is a little bit of a pandora’s box here.
The model you’re creating here is more structured ‘gig economy’ path for software dev. Sure, you’ve got things like UpWork, and other freelance products, but the purchasers (e.g., business) are effectively taking a risky bet on the work which can tamper commitment to purchasing work that way.
But with ‘no merge, no fee’ could create a very strange dynamic where companies will opportunistically throw work over the wall and create bounty-like dynamics. I don’t know if this is particularly bad for the purchaser, but for the seller that could lead to some challenges overtime (race to the bottom etc)