Every once and then I am asked whether it makes sense to call me a $kas dev.
Initially, I would insist that I am not a dev, because in the industry I came from there was a very clear separation between dev work and research work (though many people participate in both, as did I for a while).
I was just used to the business norm that "developers" are people who write production code, which I never did for Kaspa.
I realized that in CT and generally outside the rooms where R&D is made, people don't care too much for that distinction, and a "developer" is any one that had an engineering contribution to the technologoy.
Of these I have quite a few (either as my own projects, or sharing forces with Y, M and others): security proof, DAA algo, original IDB protocol, pruning rules, KIP-5, KIP-6, KIP-9, fee estimation, and quite a few others.
On the other hand, a requirement for being "a dev" is that "devving" is a top priority for you, and I can't say that it is for me. I help where ever I can, it has happened few times throughout the years that my expertise was helpful and I was called to help come up with a solution or understanding a problem. However, my routine is spent on other stuff: most of the time goes to work on my book, and the remaining time goes to business development and advocation. That is, going to conferences, giving talks and interviews, sitting in meetings, coming up with initiatives, consulting other initiatives, and trying to help information flow through the many other constituents of the community working on promoting, developing and advancing Kaspa.
People think of me as "a theoretician", but I do have a degree in computer science from a great school, and I did work as a software/firmware/algorithms engineer for several reputable companies (including Intel and Mobileye) before realizing that while I can do software development, I don't particularly enjoy it. Besides, I make sure to routinely do some recreational coding to keep my coding skills at least in some shape. So while I lend myself more to theory, it's not like my engineering muscles completely atrophied lol.
So I think I would describe myself as "developer emeritus". I spent enough time and effort as "a dev" (in the broad sense, that encompasses all R&D) to built a deep and wide understanding of the technology, the teams behind it, and the development process. But my passions and skill-set drove me in a more educational, talkative direction.
So if someone asks if I am a dev, I think the best answer is "you think too much about labels man".
Hey $kas. The part of my book explaining the blockDAG paradigm is finally available online! Next step: a deep dive into GHOSTDAG!
Join this journey with me.