The article makes excellent points. Many engineers (and the entire "agile" paradigm) is focused on making the leaves overly concrete and calling it major progre

The article makes excellent points. Many engineers (and the entire "agile" paradigm) is focused on making the leaves overly concrete and calling it major progress. This is due to significant cynicism about many aspects of product and engineering. I've encountered many systems built leaf-first that end up with no real architecture and are just refactor after refactor that ends up usually having a few "highly skilled" developers who know it inside out but nobody else can figure it out because it is by this point so illogical. The worst is when old names are kept but they no longer mean what they mean in plain language. System design and architecture (especially when the product is open-ended like any startup) is hard, and over-polishing leaves is comparatively easy, and many startups fail before they face the music for no architecture and the engineers go on to the next job thinking they did everything right.