3 ms·
You should also consider that the contrarian nature of HN would set it up to exactly the opposite reaction had the post expressed the reverse of its current pos
by mekoka 6y ago
You should also consider that the contrarian nature of HN would set it up to exactly the opposite reaction had the post expressed the reverse of its current positions. The big irony is that it's not inconceivable that it would involve some of the same actors voicing different opinions.
> "the incentives of modern software engineering value complexity to artificially strengthen a software engineering job economy"
Not sure I would agree. Hanlon's razor comes to mind. To me, the referred complexity is reminiscent of a number of other complex patterns that somehow found their ways in software engineering, out of possibly good intentions. Regardless, an idea needs to be sold and when the marketing is well executed the community will ingest the kool-aid. Which it then tries to digest for a few years. Then begins a game of chicken that consists in not being the first to admit that you're in pain, out of fear of being branded an infidel, or out of sunk cost bias. Eventually a few courageous and influential souls finally spit it out in disgust and scream "wtf is this shit?!?" Then the rest awakes from the common stupor and a holy war ensues. I still remember SOAP. I still remember with what verve I was sold Scrum.
As for Kubernetes, only time will tell.
- sriku 6y ago> " that somehow found their ways in software engineering, out of possibly good intentions" It seems that systems and principles invented for some specific situations get rapidly entrenched as "best practice" due to the wild success of their root corporations. That's twisted much like fashion - "that dress looks great on that model, maybe if I wear that dress, I would look good too".
- solidasparagus 6y agoThere's some truth in that, but there's more to it. Successful tech companies build good tech that is often worth adopting: - the companies' successes are often predicated on strong ability to develop technologies - good (well-maintained) technology requires resources and the successful tech companies have those resources.
- sriku 6y agoValid. The "fashion" point was more about P(adoption worthy tech | successful originator) != P(successful originator | adoption worthy tech)