2 ms·

"Agile" just means "analyse the situation until you have properly fleshed out specifications, great requirements that will solve the problem as described, and a

"Agile" just means "analyse the situation until you have properly fleshed out specifications, great requirements that will solve the problem as described, and a proper plan for development". Still, "Analyze until Completion" doesn't need to be couched in fancy new-age terms that someone will get paid to teach everyone ..

pjc50 5y ago
In startup land, it's often quicker to ship software than analyze, and this tends to win in the market. The "analyze" worldview assumes that the easiest and most accurate format for the output of an "analyze" process is some natural language text and maybe diagrams and a powerpoint or two. What if the friction of authoring software was reduced to the point that the easiest output of "analyze" was .. working software? The absolute extreme example of this is of course SpaceX: classical control systems theory can't quite deliver a hoverslam landing that works first time, so they had to iterate by crashing rockets.
- boffinAudio 5y ago
  >What if the friction of authoring software was reduced to the point that the easiest output of "analyze" was .. working software? Well, the software world is certainly working hard - on one side - to reasonably attain this goal, while another big portion of it actively resists this advancement in human social services, such that it represents. Perhaps that is the key thing to all of this: "Until all of us are using waterfall, many of us will have a hard time using waterfall." I'm not sure I like where this leads, so I'll just agree with you that sometimes you just have to crash rockets.
  - pjc50 5y ago
    > actively resists this advancement in human social services, > "Until all of us are using waterfall, many of us will have a hard time using waterfall. Now you've lost me, I've no idea what you're talking about with the first statement and the latter just sounds like cultism? People have valid reasons for iterative processes!
    - boffinAudio 5y ago
      It goes like this: for as long as we are incompletely applying waterfall, someone else will attempt to refactor the natural process and call it something else, instead of just recognizing and then completing the waterfall process. This will be the state of things until either a) everyone abandons waterfall and/or calls it something else or b) waterfall is just so well understood as a natural law of the industry. So its really more of a self-fulfilling prophecy situation, and yes in that regard, we are in a cult.
      - pjc50 5y ago
        This is just "communism can never fail, it can only be failed" but for Waterfall.
        boffinAudio 5y ago
        Inasmuch as software development and communism are both social services, yes. Bad software fails to deliver on the social promise. As does any particularly bad political philosophy.
        Supermancho 5y ago
        Over time all political philosophy has failed to deliver on promises, because people. Same is probably true of software because, people.

pjc50 5y ago

In startup land, it's often quicker to ship software than analyze, and this tends to win in the market. The "analyze" worldview assumes that the easiest and most accurate format for the output of an "analyze" process is some natural language text and maybe diagrams and a powerpoint or two. What if the friction of authoring software was reduced to the point that the easiest output of "analyze" was .. working software? The absolute extreme example of this is of course SpaceX: classical control systems theory can't quite deliver a hoverslam landing that works first time, so they had to iterate by crashing rockets.

boffinAudio 5y ago
>What if the friction of authoring software was reduced to the point that the easiest output of "analyze" was .. working software? Well, the software world is certainly working hard - on one side - to reasonably attain this goal, while another big portion of it actively resists this advancement in human social services, such that it represents. Perhaps that is the key thing to all of this: "Until all of us are using waterfall, many of us will have a hard time using waterfall." I'm not sure I like where this leads, so I'll just agree with you that sometimes you just have to crash rockets.
- pjc50 5y ago
  > actively resists this advancement in human social services, > "Until all of us are using waterfall, many of us will have a hard time using waterfall. Now you've lost me, I've no idea what you're talking about with the first statement and the latter just sounds like cultism? People have valid reasons for iterative processes!
  - boffinAudio 5y ago
    It goes like this: for as long as we are incompletely applying waterfall, someone else will attempt to refactor the natural process and call it something else, instead of just recognizing and then completing the waterfall process. This will be the state of things until either a) everyone abandons waterfall and/or calls it something else or b) waterfall is just so well understood as a natural law of the industry. So its really more of a self-fulfilling prophecy situation, and yes in that regard, we are in a cult.
    - pjc50 5y ago
      This is just "communism can never fail, it can only be failed" but for Waterfall.
      - boffinAudio 5y ago
        Inasmuch as software development and communism are both social services, yes. Bad software fails to deliver on the social promise. As does any particularly bad political philosophy.
        Supermancho 5y ago
        Over time all political philosophy has failed to deliver on promises, because people. Same is probably true of software because, people.