That is a good point. What I take from the article as valid is the value of an engineer’s general attitude toward these matters. Having worked with a fair amou

That is a good point. What I take from the article as valid is the value of an engineer’s general attitude toward these matters. Having worked with a fair amount of devs who are very clever, but instead of having a sense of wonder and curiosity about the tech their systems rely on, they show a disdain for it. The kinds of fixes I’ve seen almost go into prod are scary, e.g. “the packaging system will not pack this 3rd party exe in with our code, so I’ll rename it to txt” - anything to avoid understanding the lower level mechanism and devise a sane solution. And management is thrilled because they deliver on schedule; engineers who protest the “working” approach are, at best, placated with a tech debt story in the backlog. Your comment and many others here start their criticism by conflating builders with end users - does every taxi driver need to be a mechanic? This comes off as a bit of a strawman since the author is referring to building software, not simply consuming it. If the person who designed my car is just selecting prefab components on the strength of blog posts and industry hype, with weak knowledge of how they are built, I’d be worried.