3 ms·
To be honest, if the author of this communicated pitches as ineffectively as this piece communicated the topic in its title, I am not surprised that whatever na
by viccis 2y ago
To be honest, if the author of this communicated pitches as ineffectively as this piece communicated the topic in its title, I am not surprised that whatever nameless gatekeeper he's talking about passed on his pitch.
That's not even to get into the fact that executives don't necessarily need to understand software implementation details to size up an idea.
Very odd blog post.
- marcus_holmes 2y agoYeah but I think that's the point, isn't it? The author expected the people who were gatekeeping which tech got built to understand the tech that they were deciding on [0]. Instead they did not understand tech but understood business. Which means that a techie explaining the idea to them had to couch it in business terms. Y'know: a pitch. If a techie is explaining a tech idea to another techie, we use completely different language than if we're communicating to a non-techie. This blog post feels like that, like they're talking to a group of peers rather than an audience with a different viewpoint on the world. [0] I think it's a little naive, but perfectly understandable, to expect this kind of person to understand the tech. It is interesting that these decisions are made by business folk with no understanding of the tech. There are, after all, business people who do understand tech available to make this kind of decision.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]