A few weeks ago I accidentally sparked, via this tweet, an entertaining debate about what it takes to be called a developer. This led to my post "Do you even develop, bro?", where I explained my view on when it might be appropriate. (Spoiler: It's a broad term.) But my friend Brendan Whitsitt of Imprint Development has just published an even better post on the topic. It's called "Developer vs. Dirt-Flipper" and you should give it a read.

In it, he says this:

So if we tried to sketch a Platonic ideal for what a developer is, we might say that the ideal developer would have a solid understanding of, and experience in, all phases of development, including construction. This person will have a holistic perspective that attempts to optimize across all phases of a project rather than just one part.

This doesn't relate directly to the debate of who should be called a developer, but I think it's an insightful comment. Developers have very specific skillsets, but they also tend to be generalists. Our job is to stitch together lots of different disciplines and elements to ultimately produce a space that people can live, work, play, and/or do other things inside. The more you know about the entire process, the better you can be at any one part.

I even think this transcends just the development process. The more you know and understand about cities, market trends, human behavior and countless other things, the more thoughtful you can be about formulating new developments. It's never ending and it makes for an interesting line of work. But I do think this raises the question of: When is it valuable to specialize?

For example, some development companies like to follow a division of labor model. One team focuses on acquiring new sites, one team focuses on approvals/entitlements, and so on. Once a particular phase is completed, the project gets passed on to the next group. And in theory, these specialist teams should be able to go deeper and harder than a team forced to spread their time.

But on the flip side, it means that the person trying to buy sites might not be thinking about what a pain in the ass it will be to build on. They may just be trying to get deals done. Let the other team worry about building the thing. So personally, I've always liked the accountability that comes with taking a project from beginning to end — it's never somebody else's problem. It's your problem.

Of course, even if you don't do this, you're still a developer.

Cover photo by Max Langelott on Unsplash

Uber's stock has done exceptionally well this year. At the time of writing this post, it's up over 60% year-to-date. But at the same time, it remains unclear to me what the relationship will be between Uber and this brave new world of autonomous vehicles.

I mean, right now, if you're in Phoenix, I'm told you can order a Waymo car through Uber's app. But if you're in San Francisco, Waymo customers must use the Waymo app. It's all bit mirky right now, but Uber is just trying to put "as many cars on Uber's network as possible."

There's also an argument that, for the foreseeable future, ride-hailing networks are going to need some mixture of both human and robot drivers. I get this argument. But beyond the short term, I think there will be strong incentives to completely eliminate human drivers.

Last month, the New York Times announced that Uber is in talks with Travis Kalanick, the company's co-founder who got pushed out 8 years ago, to help him buy autonomous vehicle company Pony.ai.

It's a bit of an interesting story. Pony is a Chinese company, but because the US doesn't want Chinese tech to become too deeply embedded in the American economy — and has become increasingly hostile to such companies — it has been readying a clean US subsidiary of the business for sale.

This is what Travis allegedly wants to buy with the help of Uber. And it's particularly noteworthy because it could be an indication that Uber is worried about Waymo and wants to have its own AV unit (which it had previously, but then sold off in an effort to quickly reach profitability).

My sense is that Uber needs to do something along these lines. The risk of not having autonomous vehicle capabilities is simply too great.

Cover photo by Viktor Avdeev on Unsplash

Neat B and I just booked some end-of-the-summer travel. We're going to bounce around to a few different places, but the plan is to end up in Paris and then spend a week there working remotely — you know, from the Paris office.

And by the Paris office, I mean a generous 323 sf aparthotel with a small kitchen, workspace, and shared laundry facility that we rented in the 10th. I started by searching diligently for an Airbnb; but I couldn't find anything we liked, so I ended booking something through Edgar Suites.

As part of this trip, I'm aiming to meet as many industry people as possible and hopefully tour some development projects. One of my goals is to better understand how Paris consistently pulls off beautiful infill housing projects like this.

So if you're a developer, architect, investor, or other kind of city builder based in Paris, please drop me a line at brandon.donnelly@globizen.com. I'd love to connect and learn more about your city and market, and about what you're up to.

Coffee and yummy pastries on me, of course.