4 ms·
This isn't what the article proposes. The article is about top-down organization/planning versus individual programmers having the autonomy to figure out the ne
by jebarker 2y ago
This isn't what the article proposes. The article is about top-down organization/planning versus individual programmers having the autonomy to figure out the next right thing to work on based on indicators left by prior work, e.g. emails, todo items, issues. If anything I'd say this gives individual programmers more autonomy and influence over the direction the software takes. I think this makes a lot of sense.
- slt2021 2y agoWe are already living and working like ants in a colony. Human corporation is not much different from ant colony. Ants have queen, humans have CEO. Ants have spec: worker/warrior/support, humans have work specialization: sales/developer/support/etc. the same pattern emerges at the state/country/economy level: taxpayers/military/elites: a human only exists to work, pay taxes and pay bills the ultimate emergent goal is total subjugation of a human economic unit to the needs of a colony
- jebarker 2y agoThis is a very pessimistic view of the world. In return for contributing to the needs of the colony you benefit from all the colony has to offer.
- worthless-trash 2y agoYou mostly benefit from some of what the colony has to offer, there is a difference.
- jebarker 2y agoGood point
- SketchySeaBeast 2y agoThe problem is that the business doesn't trust programmers to build the software in the direction they want. Which is honestly a valid concern, I'd spend way more time than they'd want refactoring and optimizing the code to be cleaner and more extensible, and that gets in the way of piling up the features.