4 ms·

Yes, but I think what those DIY solutions do is to lower the initial barrier to achieve some kind of automation at the cost of accumulating technical debt at a

Yes, but I think what those DIY solutions do is to lower the initial barrier to achieve some kind of automation at the cost of accumulating technical debt at a much faster pace. It's not entirely clear to me what the long term impact on demand for software development is. In some cases, cobbled together ad hoc solutions can last and actually work well for a long time. They avoid the cost of overdesigned systems built for a future that never arrives using fashionable technologies of the day. In other cases it looks like the externalities of this designless process are far greater than the direct benefits as adding features either slows to a crawl or massively increases the chance of human error. Judging by the pre-virus job market, there is no sign of any decline in demand for in-house software developers. What worries me far more than that is the tendency toward funnelling everything through a handful of oligopolist gatekeepers that are in a position to extract a huge share of the value developers create.

yetihehe 6y ago
> What worries me far more than that is the tendency toward funnelling everything through a handful of oligopolist gatekeepers that are in a position to extract a huge share of the value developers create. Like with those factory owners who extracted huge share of the value that weavers created? Concentration and amplification of imagining/developin/computing/manufacturing power through tools means someone who wields those tools will have more power. Now the question is how to maintain social equality (give some of that power back to people who do not want to have that power?). That currently leads to heavy taxation of production and basic income experiments.
- fauigerzigerk 6y ago
  I think what we need is for governments to make sure that markets function properly. In our industry that often means mandating open access to data and guaranteed access to APIs and distribution channels at reasonable cost under reasonable terms. Also, we need independent dispute arbitration when it comes to accessing highly concentrated distribution platforms.
panta 6y ago
I agree. I would only add that when the problem space is not well understood, these cobbled together solutions can also give the illusion of working well, but being suboptimal in the long term they can accumulate large "missed-opportunity" costs. This is where experience can make a huge difference. EDIT: spelling
bcrosby95 6y ago
> What worries me far more than that is the tendency toward funnelling everything through a handful of oligopolist gatekeepers that are in a position to extract a huge share of the value developers create. I was worried about this too back in the late 90s/early 00s. It certainly seemed to be the way the world was heading at the time. But I sort of feel like, due to the low startup costs of software, it is going to be much more difficult to happen. Also, in software, economies of scale kinda work in reverse: the more customers you have, the more complex your software has to be, the more people you have to hire to write it, and the less efficient per developer you are.
- ec109685 6y ago
  It depends on what you are measuring efficiency based on. If it is revenge per developer, that will likely go up as the number of customers increase, which is why SaaS businesses can be so lucrative.
  - ec109685 6y ago
    “Revenue” :)
- fauigerzigerk 6y ago
  I wasn't worried about it back then, because whether or not I could deploy on a particular computer or access some data was a matter of trust between me and my customers. No middlemen, no gatekeepers. Today, many users are only reachable via platforms/shops that are severely restricted and/or dominated by a few all powerful overlords that can ban you for life, rendering your skills null and void in the blink of an AI - no recourse. Some of that is understandable. Users' trust was misused. There is a constant onslaught of all sorts of miscreants trying to exploit every imaginable loophole, technical or social. Everyone is seeking protection in the arms of someone powerful. But there is also a very large degree of market dysfunction. Just look at their margins. Look at their revenue cut. Look at their terms of service. They can dictate absolutely everything and grant you absolutely no rights whatsoever. And there are like five of them on the entire planet ruling over those distribution channels. The only right you have is to walk away. Now try walking away from the only market there is. You're leaving behind 99% of your potential customers. Not in my worst nightmares would I have imagined a dystopia like this back in the 90s.

yetihehe 6y ago

> What worries me far more than that is the tendency toward funnelling everything through a handful of oligopolist gatekeepers that are in a position to extract a huge share of the value developers create. Like with those factory owners who extracted huge share of the value that weavers created? Concentration and amplification of imagining/developin/computing/manufacturing power through tools means someone who wields those tools will have more power. Now the question is how to maintain social equality (give some of that power back to people who do not want to have that power?). That currently leads to heavy taxation of production and basic income experiments.

fauigerzigerk 6y ago
I think what we need is for governments to make sure that markets function properly. In our industry that often means mandating open access to data and guaranteed access to APIs and distribution channels at reasonable cost under reasonable terms. Also, we need independent dispute arbitration when it comes to accessing highly concentrated distribution platforms.

panta 6y ago

I agree. I would only add that when the problem space is not well understood, these cobbled together solutions can also give the illusion of working well, but being suboptimal in the long term they can accumulate large "missed-opportunity" costs. This is where experience can make a huge difference. EDIT: spelling

bcrosby95 6y ago

> What worries me far more than that is the tendency toward funnelling everything through a handful of oligopolist gatekeepers that are in a position to extract a huge share of the value developers create. I was worried about this too back in the late 90s/early 00s. It certainly seemed to be the way the world was heading at the time. But I sort of feel like, due to the low startup costs of software, it is going to be much more difficult to happen. Also, in software, economies of scale kinda work in reverse: the more customers you have, the more complex your software has to be, the more people you have to hire to write it, and the less efficient per developer you are.

ec109685 6y ago
It depends on what you are measuring efficiency based on. If it is revenge per developer, that will likely go up as the number of customers increase, which is why SaaS businesses can be so lucrative.
- ec109685 6y ago
  “Revenue” :)
fauigerzigerk 6y ago
I wasn't worried about it back then, because whether or not I could deploy on a particular computer or access some data was a matter of trust between me and my customers. No middlemen, no gatekeepers. Today, many users are only reachable via platforms/shops that are severely restricted and/or dominated by a few all powerful overlords that can ban you for life, rendering your skills null and void in the blink of an AI - no recourse. Some of that is understandable. Users' trust was misused. There is a constant onslaught of all sorts of miscreants trying to exploit every imaginable loophole, technical or social. Everyone is seeking protection in the arms of someone powerful. But there is also a very large degree of market dysfunction. Just look at their margins. Look at their revenue cut. Look at their terms of service. They can dictate absolutely everything and grant you absolutely no rights whatsoever. And there are like five of them on the entire planet ruling over those distribution channels. The only right you have is to walk away. Now try walking away from the only market there is. You're leaving behind 99% of your potential customers. Not in my worst nightmares would I have imagined a dystopia like this back in the 90s.