4 ms·

The amazing thing about tech-people and especially developer and related is that they are expected to and required to grasp an understanding of other people’s

by dagaci 3y ago

The amazing thing about tech-people and especially developer and related is that they are expected to and required to grasp an understanding of other people’s professions in order provide products/services. So I would actually expect tech-people to be able to talk reasonably about non -tech areas and to be quite happy to be corrected when they are way off the track..

uoaei 3y ago
Nah, they think they understand, and run with an under-informed opinion on something they have no to little real-world experience with until they've replaced the client's original concerns with something that's oversimplified for the sake of shoving into this or that software architecture pattern. There are of course trans-disciplinary efforts done right but those take orders of magnitude more time than your typical VCs or zealous ladder-climbers allow in development timelines. Software developers have been bailed out from having to confront this situation up to now because those who ask for software tend to ask for extremely simple workflow-helper type stuff rather than domain-expert-amplifier type stuff (see: pretty much every SaaS webapp ever). But the low-hanging fruit are getting pretty sparse by this point in the bubble.
- germinalphrase 3y ago
  “those who ask for software tend to ask for extremely simple workflow-helper type stuff rather than domain-expert-amplifier type stuff” I was a HS English teacher for about ten years before moving into tech, and this reality was a source of frequent frustration with (most/almost all) new ed-tech offerings. There are enough practical constraints on instruction quality that amplification tools would be welcome; however, improving educational quality through improving instrumental performance does not appear to be a notable focus. FWIW: I believe the low hanging fruit begins with assessment.

by dagaci 3y ago

uoaei 3y ago

Nah, they think they understand, and run with an under-informed opinion on something they have no to little real-world experience with until they've replaced the client's original concerns with something that's oversimplified for the sake of shoving into this or that software architecture pattern. There are of course trans-disciplinary efforts done right but those take orders of magnitude more time than your typical VCs or zealous ladder-climbers allow in development timelines. Software developers have been bailed out from having to confront this situation up to now because those who ask for software tend to ask for extremely simple workflow-helper type stuff rather than domain-expert-amplifier type stuff (see: pretty much every SaaS webapp ever). But the low-hanging fruit are getting pretty sparse by this point in the bubble.

germinalphrase 3y ago
“those who ask for software tend to ask for extremely simple workflow-helper type stuff rather than domain-expert-amplifier type stuff” I was a HS English teacher for about ten years before moving into tech, and this reality was a source of frequent frustration with (most/almost all) new ed-tech offerings. There are enough practical constraints on instruction quality that amplification tools would be welcome; however, improving educational quality through improving instrumental performance does not appear to be a notable focus. FWIW: I believe the low hanging fruit begins with assessment.