3 ms·

I actually think the bias can go either way. Sometimes, technologists are suspicious of new practices and assume the motive is neophilia You can see this in Mc

I actually think the bias can go either way. Sometimes, technologists are suspicious of new practices and assume the motive is neophilia You can see this in McKindley's talk. Developers who want productivity improvements are just after "shiny things". Because they're stupid, like kids or animals, get it?

peterhunt 4y ago
It's possible that you and I have different experiences. But many times I've seen people at FAANG gunning for that coveted E6/Staff promo choose new technology even when unnecessary, because it's hard to find projects that demonstrate the skills needed for that promo. The context also matters. If you're working on a small team with low attrition, the cost of choosing new technology is low. If you're on a large team or in a high attrition environment, the costs for choosing a new, unfamiliar technology are astronomical.
andrewmutz 4y ago
> Technologists are suspicious of new practices and assume the motive is neophilia This is the opposite of what I've experienced
subtra3t 4y ago
I personally find that most developers (especially those in a web related field) tend to shift to newer technologies when there is very little reason to do so, and perhaps more importantly, be an evangelical today. Ask yourself this: do you seriously think that a company would benefit from switching stacks every few years, or sticking with a mature and battletested technology?
- ratww 4y ago
  I find that this happens mostly due to career expectations. Gotta stay up to date to get the recruiters chasing you. But when everyone else is also up to date, gotta stay ahead and be an influencer/evangelist. > Ask yourself this: do you seriously think that a company would benefit from switching stacks every few years, or sticking with a mature and battletested technology? In my experience this is unfortunately situational, and depends heavily on who's answering. Someone who loves the current stack will say "don't change it". Someone who loves the next stack will say "yes burn it to the ground". Both of them, after doing a bit more self-reflection, will probably say "well, it depends, but probably not".
- zero_shift 4y ago
  I personally find that folk online who accuse "web developers" of neophilia over-estimate the amount of change in webdev and show little interest in the motives behind new practices. For instance, calling React "yet another new framework" when it's eight years old. Or loudly opining "why does everyone want to stop writing traditional CSS? These JS programmers are idiots" rather than pausing to reflect that, actually, CSS might actually have a bad reputation for a reason.
  - marcosdumay 4y ago
    > CSS might actually have a bad reputation for a reason Hum... You mean people that hate CSS but somehow love JS? I don't think I trust their judgement.
hitekker 4y ago
Nah, the phrase is "choose boring tech", not "choose convenient tech". The problem is that calling out "resume-driven development" triggers the resume-driven developer. They're enraged but they don't know why they're enraged. They feel condescended, like they're being treated beneath their station. Instead of digging into this feeling, the resume-driven developer just blames other people. The possibility that maybe the resume-driven developer is overestimating themselves & confusing the word “fun” with “productive” never crosses their mind.

peterhunt 4y ago

It's possible that you and I have different experiences. But many times I've seen people at FAANG gunning for that coveted E6/Staff promo choose new technology even when unnecessary, because it's hard to find projects that demonstrate the skills needed for that promo. The context also matters. If you're working on a small team with low attrition, the cost of choosing new technology is low. If you're on a large team or in a high attrition environment, the costs for choosing a new, unfamiliar technology are astronomical.

andrewmutz 4y ago

> Technologists are suspicious of new practices and assume the motive is neophilia This is the opposite of what I've experienced

subtra3t 4y ago

I personally find that most developers (especially those in a web related field) tend to shift to newer technologies when there is very little reason to do so, and perhaps more importantly, be an evangelical today. Ask yourself this: do you seriously think that a company would benefit from switching stacks every few years, or sticking with a mature and battletested technology?

ratww 4y ago
I find that this happens mostly due to career expectations. Gotta stay up to date to get the recruiters chasing you. But when everyone else is also up to date, gotta stay ahead and be an influencer/evangelist. > Ask yourself this: do you seriously think that a company would benefit from switching stacks every few years, or sticking with a mature and battletested technology? In my experience this is unfortunately situational, and depends heavily on who's answering. Someone who loves the current stack will say "don't change it". Someone who loves the next stack will say "yes burn it to the ground". Both of them, after doing a bit more self-reflection, will probably say "well, it depends, but probably not".
zero_shift 4y ago
I personally find that folk online who accuse "web developers" of neophilia over-estimate the amount of change in webdev and show little interest in the motives behind new practices. For instance, calling React "yet another new framework" when it's eight years old. Or loudly opining "why does everyone want to stop writing traditional CSS? These JS programmers are idiots" rather than pausing to reflect that, actually, CSS might actually have a bad reputation for a reason.
- marcosdumay 4y ago
  > CSS might actually have a bad reputation for a reason Hum... You mean people that hate CSS but somehow love JS? I don't think I trust their judgement.

hitekker 4y ago

Nah, the phrase is "choose boring tech", not "choose convenient tech". The problem is that calling out "resume-driven development" triggers the resume-driven developer. They're enraged but they don't know why they're enraged. They feel condescended, like they're being treated beneath their station. Instead of digging into this feeling, the resume-driven developer just blames other people. The possibility that maybe the resume-driven developer is overestimating themselves & confusing the word “fun” with “productive” never crosses their mind.