About the only issue I take with this article is the reference to "lazy". I know it's the colloquial reference with good intentions, but the implication is stil

About the only issue I take with this article is the reference to "lazy". I know it's the colloquial reference with good intentions, but the implication is still negative. In the systems I've architected, well-structured code, proper tests, good docs, operational goodness -- all that came about through spending time and energy understanding how to do that well. It's come through watching others, learning how others have solved the same problem I've solved, trying new things, keeping my skills current, returning to sharpen skills that may have dulled. I just happen to do it outside the guise of a living, breathing, production system. I know the article implies this as well, but I just wanted to highlight it in depth. What the article references to laziness, I ascribe to competent and responsible engineering.