I agree it'd be nicer if he could dive down deeper into tangibles. However that can take a lot of time in a talk like this. Many of the points he makes could al

I agree it'd be nicer if he could dive down deeper into tangibles. However that can take a lot of time in a talk like this. Many of the points he makes could almost warrant a whole entire talk/article on its own. For example, he rails hard on ADTs/classes -- I think he's right here, but this point could be elaborated on at length. Still, I look at Rich as someone who: - has had many years of hard-won practical experience - whose value system is ultra-pragmatic[1] Now that doesn't mean his ideas should be taken without discretion or inspection. Even hardly-mortals like are RH are subject to the flaws of man. But if you're willing to think that he might be speaking some truths, then he gives a lot of threads that we can follow to find out for ourselves. For example, are ADTs really so horrible has he claims? That is something you can start diving into and asking yourself: What if I got rid of all my ADTs and starting programming more with maps and a la carte type validation instead of static types everywhere? That is something we can go put to practice and find out if it is really so liberating as RH is saying. [1] This is important. In tech, a lot of value systems are oriented around other things: what is cool and what is fun and what is intellectually stimulating. Versus what is most pointedly addressing our business needs.