3 ms·
As much as I understand the frustration here, the reason why programmers aren't trusted to make decisions is because they've consistently failed to earn that tr
by notriddle 6y ago
As much as I understand the frustration here, the reason why programmers aren't trusted to make decisions is because they've consistently failed to earn that trust.
Big tasks with lots of room for error is what gave us the platforms of the 80's: barely-usable "power" platforms like Linux, over-promise-under-deliver demo OS's like Windows 95, the pile of hacks called The Web, and the pile of less-famous code that gives rise to organizations with names like Destroy All Software.
The micromanagement might not be much better, but acting like coders should be given more trust and responsibility is laughable.
- RcouF1uZ4gsC 6y ago> over-promise-under-deliver demo OS's like Windows 95, Windows 95 was a very successful OS given all the trade offs it had to achieve: 1. Long file names without breaking backwards compatibility 2. Be able to run 32-bit software while also being able to run DOS programs that thought they were the only thing running on the computer 3. Have all the existing Windows software just run without any issues, even when they used undocumented functions or did stuff that was bad. 4. Do all this with 4 MB of RAM and a 33 MHz 386.
- rthomas6 6y agoI can't tell if this is satirical or not. The examples of bad software given are two of the most popular and widely used OS's of all time, and the internet. Are these things piles of hacks? Yes, but for Linux and the internet, they are arguably antifragile, and are so because of the way they're made. They have stood the test of time in a way that no top-down managed product has done that I'm aware of. The world would be so lucky to get another Linux-like project and another internet-like project.