3 ms·
thus eventually they become the bottleneck It's completely obvious and the "eventually" is where anything interesting happens. This comes from the early days o
by CyberDildonics 3mo ago
thus eventually they become the bottleneck
It's completely obvious and the "eventually" is where anything interesting happens. This comes from the early days of computers which is why something trivial became a supposed insight.
For Brooks the communication between people starts to dominate the time spent the more people you add, so it will eventually become the bottleneck.
Not just the communication between people while working in general but the communication to get someone involved in the project weighing down the people who would be making progress.
Feel free to come up with your own conclusions.
I did come up with own conclusion, the only similarity is the word bottleneck.
- locallost 3mo agoYou try to speed up work by parallelizing, either by adding more machines or more humans. Seems pretty similar.
- CyberDildonics 3mo agoIt might seem obvious if you don't think about it much, but one is a pragmatic breakdown from experience and one just says "adding cpus won't work forever if there is some part where you can't add more cpus". One is basically 1 + 1 = 2 and the other is a warning of a non obvious situation that comes from lots of experience and effort.
- locallost 2mo agoIt's still an interesting parallel, but that might be not be of interest if you're trying hard to be the middle guy from the bell curve meme.
- CyberDildonics 2mo agoIt's not a parallel at all, the two things have nothing to do with each other. One means nothing and gives no new information, the other is about the complexity of getting familiar with software for people which is why adding more people doesn't help despite being unintuitive. One is is good information from lots of experience, one is "the parts that don't use more cpus don't speed up with more cpus". Unhelpful nonsense about running software vs battle won experience about making software.
- locallost 2mo agoSure it is, as already explained multiple times.