4 ms·

A tool can be both beginner friendly AND powerful for advanced users. Speaking of your analogy, the role that most software developers fullfil is not an engine

by lpapez 3y ago

A tool can be both beginner friendly AND powerful for advanced users. Speaking of your analogy, the role that most software developers fullfil is not an engineer wondering about the oscilloscope, but rather the construction worker installing electrical fixtures wondering why the cable clamp has such a weird interface. Both the oscilloscope engineer in an office and the worker doing the field work would benefit from having a simple and reliable tool fit for purpose of cable clamping. There is certainly a need for competent and "proper" software engineering that require special tools and detailed training, but I would argue it's niche and filled by people who build the tools themselves. IMO the largest share of developers today are doing brick-laying work (which of course takes skill, I am not underestimating it) and would benefit a lot from having simpler tools - they don't need to know how to use an oscilloscope at all.

dolni 3y ago
> IMO the largest share of developers today are doing brick-laying work (which of course takes skill, I am not underestimating it) and would benefit a lot from having simpler tools - they don't need to know how to use an oscilloscope at all. They're doing brick-laying work until they aren't. Most problems are easy to solve and don't require very much fussing over. The expertise comes in knowing which problems are worth fussing over and which aren't. Technology is becoming ever more present in our lives, not less. Reducing software engineering to a low-skill trade when there is, in fact, mountains of complexity is surefire way for software to be a heap of shit. And in a lot of ways it already is.
- lpapez 3y ago
  > Reducing software engineering to a low-skill trade when there is, in fact, mountains of complexity is surefire way for software to be a heap of shit. And in a lot of ways it already is. I fully agree with this observation, but the reality is that this is where things are going. Software quality is simply not that relevant today for the majority of software. As long as the billing works fine, the management is happy to see your website barely working - screw the quality if the money is coming in anyway. Such software costs much less and can be built by bricklayers.

by lpapez 3y ago

dolni 3y ago

> IMO the largest share of developers today are doing brick-laying work (which of course takes skill, I am not underestimating it) and would benefit a lot from having simpler tools - they don't need to know how to use an oscilloscope at all. They're doing brick-laying work until they aren't. Most problems are easy to solve and don't require very much fussing over. The expertise comes in knowing which problems are worth fussing over and which aren't. Technology is becoming ever more present in our lives, not less. Reducing software engineering to a low-skill trade when there is, in fact, mountains of complexity is surefire way for software to be a heap of shit. And in a lot of ways it already is.

lpapez 3y ago
> Reducing software engineering to a low-skill trade when there is, in fact, mountains of complexity is surefire way for software to be a heap of shit. And in a lot of ways it already is. I fully agree with this observation, but the reality is that this is where things are going. Software quality is simply not that relevant today for the majority of software. As long as the billing works fine, the management is happy to see your website barely working - screw the quality if the money is coming in anyway. Such software costs much less and can be built by bricklayers.