2 ms·
Suppose that you're a bridge engineer. Ten years ago, when you learned your craft it was usual to build larger, sturdy, bridges from cast iron, however recently
by tialaramex 2y ago
Suppose that you're a bridge engineer. Ten years ago, when you learned your craft it was usual to build larger, sturdy, bridges from cast iron, however recently (say five years ago) high quality bulk steel I-beams became available at a very affordable price.
The bleeding edge of your discipline is use of these I-beams, they enable you to build a comparatively elegant bridge which is far stronger and yet is less easily damaged by the elements than the iron bridges.
A "traditional" bridge engineer can point to examples of their preferred materials which have lasted fifty, a hundred years, and say look - we know cast iron works. You don't have that, and so there may be people who say "I don't want your new steel bridge", but on the other hand, clients may be swayed by the affordable yet better looking and more capable product.
In fifty years it's no contest, your steel bridges make sense, iron bridges made by your competitors are seen as old-fashioned and unnecessarily conservative. "Didn't they have steel?" "They didn't trust it". "Huh".
Now, of course it's not always so clear whether whatever you consider "Bleeding edge" is use of steel beams in bridges, or use of flammable aluminium cassette "weather cladding" on high rise buildings (a choice now seen as unacceptably dangerous). But just because it's how things were done by your grandfather doesn't mean it's a good choice today.
- kjkjadksj 2y agoA more like comparison with tech is more that there are now steel ibeams but no one at all knows how to design a bridge with an ibeam to maximize its benefit. You get certain alpha build bridges that will be totally unsafe despite using the new technology of the new material. The designs haven’t had a chance to hit their bugs and be iterated out and new bugs are expected to emerge very often. In your example your bridge builder presumably has a mature and stable software build equivalent of a steel ibeam bridge design that is basically going to be the same going forward. That’s more like when people still use cobol for decades because it works than when people are testing out the bleeding edge of software.
- 3eb7988a1663 2y agoPhysical infrastructure has expected lifetimes measured in years/decades. The half-life for a line of code could be as little as a year. I think being conservative in adopting new technology for something concrete is a sensible choice.