4 ms·

I think it's a very insightful article regardless of whether some tech startups successfully become gatekeepers (internet landlords?) who dominate bakers, like

I think it's a very insightful article regardless of whether some tech startups successfully become gatekeepers (internet landlords?) who dominate bakers, like Amazons of baked goods. I'm willing to accept a lot of incorrectness if the author is taking a few good concepts and pushing them to one logical extreme (which is essentially a process of exaggeration; and I expect a mental model to diverge from reality, like in any science).

bambax 15y ago
I'm wary of the fact that it basically tells us what we want to hear: the only talent that matters are developers, companies who "get" developers will survive and those who don't, won't, no matter from which industry. That's a little too good to be true, and the bakery example stroke me as very ill-suited. I enjoyed the article, though, and I wish it were true that clueless incumbents would die rapidly and developers would get infinite leverage. What I think is true is that developers will get a little more leverage while clueless incumbents will take forever to disappear. (Edit: in the long run, everyone will be a developer. There will still be good and bad developers, but there won't be non-developers professionals, just like today there are not many people with a job who can't read or write.)
- tgrass 15y ago
  Regarding everyone in the long run being a developer, there is little historical evidence for this. We are not all mechanics. In fact, the knowledge of how to make a simple repair like fixing a puncture in a tire is much less prevalent now than it was forty years ago. Nevermind the knowledge of how to troubleshoot a vehicle that won't start.
  - khafra 15y ago
    It's pretty easy to decouple transportation from what you need transported, without losing value. The author's thesis is that it is impossible to decouple development from what you need developed without losing value. It's not exactly proven in the article, but I think it has some merit.
    - tgrass 15y ago
      The modern vehicle has evolved to a highly specialized state. Though we have the capacity to design a vehicle that the common man could fix himself on the weekend, we clearly don't have enough demand for one, and the regulatory market for pollution and safety might very well make it impossible. The consequence of this is that knowledge of the mechanics of the complex system that is a modern vehicle is typically beyond any one person, and certainly well beyond the majority of its users. Today there is leverage in far flung industries for the individual who has specialized knowledge of his field AND knowledge of how to apply software development to that field. But these opportunities will not last long. Any software that can increase profits in an industry will attract competition from other software developers. That software will be improved and refined by software specialists. It will (and has) evolved to a systemic complexity that equals the modern vehicle. Software is a tool. The civil engineer who uses AutoCAD to design your road does not need to know how to code his own AutoCAD.
      - khafra 15y ago
        So, once your niche has sufficiently good software tailored for it, there's no profit in being a developer. That makes sense. Although industry standard tools with scripting environments often have active communities of people developing sophisticated tools on top of them. Encase is one example; the Canadian Mounties write quite a bit. Splunk is another. Niches may asymptotically outrun good software.
      - nkassis 15y ago
        Maybe not but a lot of them are very well versed in autolisp and customize their environment with it. That's what's interesting about software in my view. Once the low level plumbing is done you can always move up to a higher level and continue to build. I'm not sure what the max might be. Maybe one day programming will be much less direct and be done by non programmers than it is now, I won't hold my breath that this will occur too soon for most of us to be out of a job.

bambax 15y ago

I'm wary of the fact that it basically tells us what we want to hear: the only talent that matters are developers, companies who "get" developers will survive and those who don't, won't, no matter from which industry. That's a little too good to be true, and the bakery example stroke me as very ill-suited. I enjoyed the article, though, and I wish it were true that clueless incumbents would die rapidly and developers would get infinite leverage. What I think is true is that developers will get a little more leverage while clueless incumbents will take forever to disappear. (Edit: in the long run, everyone will be a developer. There will still be good and bad developers, but there won't be non-developers professionals, just like today there are not many people with a job who can't read or write.)

tgrass 15y ago
Regarding everyone in the long run being a developer, there is little historical evidence for this. We are not all mechanics. In fact, the knowledge of how to make a simple repair like fixing a puncture in a tire is much less prevalent now than it was forty years ago. Nevermind the knowledge of how to troubleshoot a vehicle that won't start.
- khafra 15y ago
  It's pretty easy to decouple transportation from what you need transported, without losing value. The author's thesis is that it is impossible to decouple development from what you need developed without losing value. It's not exactly proven in the article, but I think it has some merit.
  - tgrass 15y ago
    The modern vehicle has evolved to a highly specialized state. Though we have the capacity to design a vehicle that the common man could fix himself on the weekend, we clearly don't have enough demand for one, and the regulatory market for pollution and safety might very well make it impossible. The consequence of this is that knowledge of the mechanics of the complex system that is a modern vehicle is typically beyond any one person, and certainly well beyond the majority of its users. Today there is leverage in far flung industries for the individual who has specialized knowledge of his field AND knowledge of how to apply software development to that field. But these opportunities will not last long. Any software that can increase profits in an industry will attract competition from other software developers. That software will be improved and refined by software specialists. It will (and has) evolved to a systemic complexity that equals the modern vehicle. Software is a tool. The civil engineer who uses AutoCAD to design your road does not need to know how to code his own AutoCAD.
    - khafra 15y ago
      So, once your niche has sufficiently good software tailored for it, there's no profit in being a developer. That makes sense. Although industry standard tools with scripting environments often have active communities of people developing sophisticated tools on top of them. Encase is one example; the Canadian Mounties write quite a bit. Splunk is another. Niches may asymptotically outrun good software.
    - nkassis 15y ago
      Maybe not but a lot of them are very well versed in autolisp and customize their environment with it. That's what's interesting about software in my view. Once the low level plumbing is done you can always move up to a higher level and continue to build. I'm not sure what the max might be. Maybe one day programming will be much less direct and be done by non programmers than it is now, I won't hold my breath that this will occur too soon for most of us to be out of a job.