3 ms·
This sentiment, expressed collectively and somewhat unsympathetically, portrays the entire profession as prioritizing job security over true excellence.
by cliffbean 13y ago
This sentiment, expressed collectively and somewhat unsympathetically, portrays the entire profession as prioritizing job security over true excellence.
- mattgreenrocks 13y agoIndeed. But excellence should mean using the right design for a program, not the Good Enough one advocated by today's fashionable framework. I'm more concerned about collective effects (such as negating the need for analysis and design). This is yet another instance of Worse is Better.
- mooreds 13y agoWhat is worse? What is better? Often shipping something that is 'Good Enough' is better than getting the 'right' (perfect?) design for a program. In the post, it is clear that moot has a set of concerns that a typical business software developer doesn't have. So, pick the right tool for your business situation, which may include a framework, or not. But I have to say, as a developer, the times when I thought I had to start from scratch and been right were far fewer than the times I wanted to start from scratch and been wrong. That may be a testament to my skill, the problems I work on, or both.
- chongli 13y agoOr one could say that it reveals the fatal flaw in our current system of capitalism: Automation is desirable because it increases efficiency and lowers costs. Automation is undesirable because it eliminates jobs and automatons are not consumers.
- vidarh 13y agoThat was Marx main argument for the inevitability of a socialist revolution: That capitalism will eventually become efficient enough to on one hand create enough goods to make it possible to totally eradicate poverty, but on the other hand become efficient enough to substantially reduce employment.