My main point is that all "computer stuff" is accidental complexity as I believe people in 1987 would think. It might be hard to go along with it when one is so

My main point is that all "computer stuff" is accidental complexity as I believe people in 1987 would think. It might be hard to go along with it when one is software dev and much of our lives are on the internet. But that is what Fred Brooks was writing about back then. Essential complexity idea is about real world being inherently complex and that we cannot remove that complexity by making bigger better computers. Dan is not attacking this at all, he only argues that accidental complexity is not getting easier. You argue the same thing as Dan. You want to move essential complexity to a different place. But that does not refute "Essential and Accidental complexity" in context of book it is just arguing that accidental complexity is not getting easier. Fred Brooks argues that even if you make accidental complexity easier you will not make real world easier. He was not saying that accidental complexity will get easier or that it is some kind of law that it always gets easier.