Was a reductio ad absurdum really necessary? Yet there was none. Your very post, though, not only attempts to paint my comment as an "old person thing" (hilari

Was a reductio ad absurdum really necessary? Yet there was none. Your very post, though, not only attempts to paint my comment as an "old person thing" (hilariously), it then attacks the speaker ("hostile dick"). Before you (incorrectly) start claiming fallacies, maybe commit to witholding them yourself. My comment absolutely rises defensiveness among some people. But this is an endemic issue in this industry, and your personal feeling of diminished professionalism in the face of it needn't merit attack responses -- countless projects chose technologies not because they were efficient in any real world sense of that word (saving 15 minutes on the first day to pay thousands of hours later is hardly anyone's measure of "efficiency", and that you attempt to attack the very clear statement I made boggles the mind), but because they were the laziest, most accessible option available, saving a tiny amount of effort at the forefront. Generating code is easy. Generating tonnes of code is easy. Generating good, well considered solutions, learning and adopting appropriate technologies and choices...well that's hard.